Michigan is changing
This Free Press poll is fascinating. The lead discusses at length whether Michigan residents think a possible merger (sorry, "alliance") of GM with Renault and Nissan would be good for the state. But the real story is buried further down.
"The major split between union and nonunion households came when Michiganders were asked whether the unions would have to accept wage and benefit cuts in order for manufacturing jobs to survive in Michigan against global competition.
Overall, 67% agreed the unions would have to sacrifice, 27% disagreed and 6% were unsure. However, when results were sorted by union and nonunion households, about three-quarters of nonunion households agreed that cuts should be accepted. Only about half of union members agreed."
Couple points. First, it is remarkable that such a significant majority of those polled think unions will have to sacrifice pay and benefits for Michigan to remain competitive. Whether that is true or not, it really points to a sea change in the way Michigan residents think about work, jobs and union power. Such a stat would have been unthinkable just a few decades ago.
There are lots of reasons for this change. First, even half of union households seem to recognize that in this global economy, union style benefits and wages are making companies like the American automakers much less competitive than companies like Wal-Mart that offer significantly lower wages and benefits. Not saying this is good or bad, but it is an increasingly inescapable fact.
Second, younger workers like myself have grown up knowing there was no future for us in the factories and, though the automakers have been very good to our families, we don't really identify ourselves with the auto industry and the unions. Ask yourself: how many people do you know who belong to a traditional industrial union? And how old are those people? For better or for worse, those days are rapidly coming to an end.
Thirdly, in part because auto industry jobs are scarce, Michigan's economy is (VERY) slowly diversifying. Michiganders today are probably as likely to be working in retail, government or I.T. than working for the auto industry. This pigybacks my previous point somewhat. These people, again, do not think of themselves as closely tied to the auto industry nor do they have the traditional union mentality of seeking higher wages and better benefits at all costs.
Lastly, the growth of places like Ann Arbor and West Michigan continues to change the state. These places have slightly better economic outlooks than the rest of the state and have virtually no ties to the auto industry.
At any rate, Michigan is changing pretty rapidly. As polls like this demonstrate, people are much less likely to dig in and fight The Man over wages and benefits and seem much less loyal to unions. Let's just hope we don't all end up working at Wal-Mart, and if we do, let's at least hope for tolerable pay, benefits and working conditions.
"The major split between union and nonunion households came when Michiganders were asked whether the unions would have to accept wage and benefit cuts in order for manufacturing jobs to survive in Michigan against global competition.
Overall, 67% agreed the unions would have to sacrifice, 27% disagreed and 6% were unsure. However, when results were sorted by union and nonunion households, about three-quarters of nonunion households agreed that cuts should be accepted. Only about half of union members agreed."
Couple points. First, it is remarkable that such a significant majority of those polled think unions will have to sacrifice pay and benefits for Michigan to remain competitive. Whether that is true or not, it really points to a sea change in the way Michigan residents think about work, jobs and union power. Such a stat would have been unthinkable just a few decades ago.
There are lots of reasons for this change. First, even half of union households seem to recognize that in this global economy, union style benefits and wages are making companies like the American automakers much less competitive than companies like Wal-Mart that offer significantly lower wages and benefits. Not saying this is good or bad, but it is an increasingly inescapable fact.
Second, younger workers like myself have grown up knowing there was no future for us in the factories and, though the automakers have been very good to our families, we don't really identify ourselves with the auto industry and the unions. Ask yourself: how many people do you know who belong to a traditional industrial union? And how old are those people? For better or for worse, those days are rapidly coming to an end.
Thirdly, in part because auto industry jobs are scarce, Michigan's economy is (VERY) slowly diversifying. Michiganders today are probably as likely to be working in retail, government or I.T. than working for the auto industry. This pigybacks my previous point somewhat. These people, again, do not think of themselves as closely tied to the auto industry nor do they have the traditional union mentality of seeking higher wages and better benefits at all costs.
Lastly, the growth of places like Ann Arbor and West Michigan continues to change the state. These places have slightly better economic outlooks than the rest of the state and have virtually no ties to the auto industry.
At any rate, Michigan is changing pretty rapidly. As polls like this demonstrate, people are much less likely to dig in and fight The Man over wages and benefits and seem much less loyal to unions. Let's just hope we don't all end up working at Wal-Mart, and if we do, let's at least hope for tolerable pay, benefits and working conditions.
posted by Mookie at
11:21 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home