Thoughts on Collective Bargaining

First off, let it be known that I am neither a psychologist nor a labor expert. However, I have spent thirty-five years in the workforce and I have been both a manager and a subordinate. Over the years, I have worked with literally hundreds of individuals whom I observed and from whom I have been able to draw certain conclusions. I have, in my opinion, acquired sufficient experience to be able to present a valid point-of-view with respect to worker performance and behavior.

---

There has been a great deal of news lately, most of it from Wisconsin, regarding “collective bargaining”. Wisconsin’s Governor, Scott Walker, has come under a great deal of fire recently from the left for his attempts to reform collective bargaining for public workers in Wisconsin, particularly the school teachers. Gov. Walker has stated that the state’s bill will not curtail collective bargaining; the governor’s opponents claim that it will. My purpose is not to debate the Wisconsin law specifically, but rather to discuss the concept of collective bargaining and its application in today’s workplace. As previously noted, I have spent many years managing others. From my experience, the quality of employees in any given workplace follows a typical bell curve; in other words, you generally have a few exceptional employees, a few true deadbeats, and the rest scattered about somewhere in the middle. For example, in a pool of twenty-five workers, you would average two individuals that would rate, on a scale of 1-10, a 9 or a 10, another two that would rate a 1 or a 2, five in the 3-4 range, another five 7-8’s, and eleven that would rate right in the middle – 5’s or 6’s. Break this down into percentages and you have a full 72 percent (18 out of 25) that rate average or above.

What does collective bargaining yield? It yields the liberal panacea: a level playing field for all

What does collective bargaining yield? It yields the liberal panacea: a level playing field for all. In other words, it makes everyone equal. But, using my workplace example, how many people actually benefit from collective bargaining? By my formula, only the 28 percent – 7 out of 25 – that rate below average. Which begs the question: If collective bargaining is so wonderful, why do fewer than one in three (two out of seven, actually) workers benefit from it? My alternative is a concept that I term “individual bargaining”. Unless you are part of the lower twenty-eight percent in terms of employee performance, why would you NOT want to be judged by an employer based upon your own merits rather than the supposed merits of the collective group? Having lived in a right-to-work state (Florida) since childhood, I do not possess the union mindset nor do I subscribe to the liberal ideals that put forth the notion that everyone is equal. In my opinion, collective bargaining is a representation of the Marxist axiom, “From each according to his ability – to each according to his need.” From my experiences in the workforce, I have learned that if I am unhappy with an employer, I meet him or her face-to-face, one-on-one and discuss it. If our differences cannot be resolved, I look for another job. It is as simple as that. Throughout my working life, I have received above-average performance evaluations. I do not want negotiations for my salary, benefits, or otherwise to be based upon the merits of the others in my workplace. I can negotiate my own salary or wage, thank you very much. I want to be judged by my OWN talents and work ethic which speak for themselves. Collective bargaining exemplifies the liberal utopia – making everyone equal. This is all well and good in a world of mediocrity. But true, hard-working citizens can, and SHOULD, do a whole lot better on their own.