Comment by adrianmonk

> Myself and others would end up pointing out that yes, that's true of some blur collar unions, but that's not what we're talking about.

I'm not totally against unions, but it seems like that's probably how all the messed up union situations started.

As far as I know, they probably all started with good intentions to improve conditions where change was really needed. None of them started with the intention of creating a bunch of bureaucracy, nor to negotiate wages higher than the market can handle, thus jeopardizing the financial health of their employer, etc.

But, like all organizations (every type in every sphere of life -- government, private sector, charity, religious, and more), there is always the danger that once the organization gets enough power to fulfill its mission, it then moves on to using the power for things it shouldn't.

That's not a reason to dismiss the idea of starting a union, but it is a hazard to be avoided. So it should probably be part of the discussion, just not in a way that's used to instantly shut down the idea.