Construction, trucking, and film industry.
I wasn't just allowed to work, some asshole always had to stick their nose into everything I did.
I was regularly told to slow down, not work so hard, take longer breaks, couldn't do something that I was more than capable of doing, not to stay late, and more. Then those fuckers topped it off by stealing money from my pay for union dues. I beat the shit out of one guy, he was such a prick, and he pushed me too far one day. I got out of the truck and beat his union ass. I fucking hate unions, the heads of every union on earth should be shot, then pissed on. If they tried doing some damn work, instead of bitching, jobs would go so much smoother and quicker.
I asked so I'll reply. Those experiences sound pretty terrible and I appreciate your being so candid. Your level of frustration with your union leaderships is off the charts.
I stand by my assertion that if the cooperative bargaining movement had never happened in America hourly laborers would be much much worse off. Without exerting pressure for better wages and safer working conditions through job actions (last resort strikes) I just don't see how or why managers/owners would have agreed to them. The only upward pressure would be labor shortages, and historically we've had waves and waves of immigrants willing to work for rock bottom wages. Labor shortages rarely if ever happened, and when they did they didn't last long. Undercutting established workers with immigrants has been the norm. Globalization of trade is undercutting established workers here without new workers having to physically come here. Undercutting gains made by established workers remains one of the biggest objections by union (and non-union) workers to allowing more legal immigration - and strident calls to stem illegal immigration. There is a shocking level of hypocrisy worth noting here. Many industries absolutely depend on illegal immigrants to do the dirty, low paying work that Americans don't want to do. On the one hand managements, especially in farming and other menial task industries, pretend to side with calls to stem immigration. On the other hand they continue to hire immigrants even when it is against the law. Fines are cheaper, if they get caught, than loss of revenue from lack of illegal workers.
My own union experiences over 30 years were far more positive than yours. I, like all new hires, was on probation for six months during which time the union had little to do with my continued employment and I could be fired for just about anything. I know of one pilot on probation who was fired for perceived disrespect to another pilot. When you've got lots of eager pilots waiting to get hired you better not fart in the cockpit if the captain decrees a no farting policy, right? Once a member in good standing I felt part of an honest representative democratic process. We regularly had council meetings where anyone could introduce resolutions (requests, basically) and have them voted upon. Our local elected reps had regular meetings with each other to take up old and new business, much of which was line pilot sentiment coming to them in the form of resolutions. We negotiated new contracts about every four years in concessionary environments, and some profitable environments, after polling the union members about their contractual goals (work rules, or pay, or benefits - we got to rank them). When we got at loggerheads with the company the legal mediation process began. It usually took years to get a new contract. When times were good management dragged their feet. When times were bad we dragged our feet. Meanwhile the status quo working agreement stayed in force. Sure, we had our share of drama about who would lead the union and what direction we should take in trying to achieve new contracts, but overall having a union was vital. It was often pretty messy, but in the end orderly.
The union depended on volunteers to be representatives and to do the work of committees. Some things I thought were very positive and helped management. One was the union had a "professional standards" committee. If you had a personal or professional problem with someone - be it a co-worker or even a union rep (maybe someone you felt like beating up) - rather than go to management we were urged to try going to this committee first. Informally one of the committee members would attempt to resolve the issue - before it ever got to a company disciplinary level or, maybe, a felony charge for assault. There were joint management/union programs that saved careers, such as for substance abuse treatment. Very important in my mind was a committee to review disciplinary cases and contractual grievances, and if that deadlocked the fate of the pilot, or the company's alleged contract violation, would be in the hands of a professional mediator. I paid a lot of money in dues over my career, but there is no question in my mind that without the union I'd have worked for half the pay I did and my employment would have felt much more tenuous and insecure. Also no one was forced to join our pilot union and if they declined they only had to pay their portion of the cost of enforcing the contract - which was fair because the union had to represent them (by law) including paying for attorneys if it came to that. Also union dues cannot be used for campaign contributions or lobbying - they have PAC's pilots can contribute to if they want for that specific purpose. In trucking with the Teamsters Union things play out similarly as with my pilot union - how much of it you were aware of, or participated in, only you know. We have pilots who believe their current duty day length and rest requirement, pay, and benefits, are magnanimously bestowed upon them by truly caring executives - pilots who believe we don't need, or shouldn't have, unions. Obviously I don't think that is realistic thinking.
Trucking is an industry with many parallels to flying. In commercial aviation, back in the "bad old days" before pilots unionized under the ALPA banner of "Schedule with Safety", managements driven by the ever-present short term profit motive would force pilots to fly in dangerous weather, fly broken planes, and fly fatigued. To refuse would mean losing your job - and managements would share blacklisted "troublesome" pilots especially if they were known to favor getting a union (which has to be voted in by workers). To agree to fly (and most top management officers weren't pilots so had little understanding of the risks) meant risking your life - and faced with the stark reality of losing their job or flying - they manned up the aircraft. There were lots of mishaps and fatalities as a result of this management pressure. It meant little to managements who viewed the loss of an airplane, or even a life, against the potentially greater returns of making schedule. It's easy to rationalize losses by framing adversity in "what's best for everybody" terms. Just think of how the whole company depends on making schedule. If we don't, our business will go with the other company that has better metrics for on time arrivals. Managements also expended as little money or effort as possible to make airports safer. Trucking is safer today in large part because unions drove safety awareness and initiatives, including with the public who shares the road - although you can find company propaganda denying the historic truth of union-driven safety improvements. Few self-congratulatory circles rival that of corporate boardrooms. I bet most of the high-fives revolve around managements thwarting requests for raises by workers.
As I mentioned in a previous post...because true unions (as opposed to sham unions to make employees feel represented) are illegal in China and many other nations run by dictatorships, workers there are unlikely to ever share fairly in the wealth generated by their labor - "fairly" always being in the eye of the beholder. Outright chattel slavery is outlawed everywhere on Earth (but only within the last 50 years in some Middle-eastern kingdoms and African nations), but it practically persists many places in the form of economic slavery under punitive systems which callously exploit workers. That is who, and what, western democratic nations are competing with - and in manufacturing where cheap labor is king we're losing.
I understand why you hate unions - from your personal experiences - and I'd be the first to agree corruption in various forms (illegal work slowdowns, feather-bedding, inefficient job descriptions) can, and has, crept into union leadership. When laws are broken union representatives have gone to jail, just as do corrupt politicians - the difference being in a true democracy people are held accountable and elsewhere they are usually not. It has happened, and it is always stupid in hindsight when it has (Eastern Airlines, for example), that intransigent unions (mechanics in that case mostly) have ignored economic realities and the upshot is a bankrupt company. In the grand scheme of things here managements always hold the legal upper hand (and should in our typically functional modified capitalist system). Global and local economic circumstances ultimately prevail in dictating pay and benefits. Legally having a grievance hearing won't save you from being justifiably fired (nor should it). History informs us having unions, and widespread union membership, shaped all our lives for the better. Not having unions worldwide results in a race to the bottom, which is exactly what we're seeing right now with globalization.
Like so much in our modern interconnected world work environments are a jumbled mix of shades of historic gray, vary greatly from industry to industry, and are the product of many competing forces which shaped, and continue to shape them.