| INSTRUCTOR DISCUSSION NOTES:
When You're Fighting for Jobs, "International Brotherhood" May Be Just Words |
1. European nations have managed to do an exceptional job of unionizing service workers - Denmark has unionized 90% of its service sector - but the U.S. unions have had no such luck. Why do you think this is the case?
The social structure in Europe is much more centralized; health benefits, vacations, etc, are much stronger than they are in the US. Unions are in place to protect those interests, and people see significant value in joining unions to receive those benefits. In some service sectors in the US, there is high job turnover, few benefits and little job security, especially as services are becoming outsourceable. US workers may see little benefit to unionization because they see unions as not strong enough to combat the job pressures in their sector.
2. Consider a unionized shop, and a non-unionized shop. What can you say about the elasticity of labor supply of a unionized shop relative to the non-unionized shop? What can you say about the elasticity of labor demand of a unionized shop? Why? Draw a graph of supply and demand for labor to illustrate your answer.
Labor supply will be more inelastic in a union shop relative to the non-union shop. Labor demand in a unionized shop will be more elastic, because the pay scales flatten out - firm can hire more unionized workers at similar wages.
3. It has been shown that unions have a difficult time unionizing women in the workforce. Why do you think this is the case? Consider the costs and benefits of female union workers in your answer.
Women tend to have shorter worklives than men (due to maternity), and therefore will see fewer benefits from unionization. Further, unions were originally founded by men to address male workers' concerns - at a time when far fewer women were in the workforce than are today - and U.S. unions have been slow to recognize and champion women workers' job issues.
©2007 South-Western. All Rights Reserved webmaster | DISCLAIMER