Coming from a French perspective, in addition to corporate, workers should also oppose union. Unions will crush work and life conditions for anyone, but a small group of people. They will morph into a cancer, nothing like advertised initially.
I hate them. They made me (and many others that I know) miserable.
This was also my dad’s experience (in the 70s and 80s in the US). He saved up his money so that he could move to an non-unionized state. He worked his way from a machinist to a general manager, and worked hard to ensure his company remained competitive in the US as their competition moved all operations to China. It was a long play, but it paid off for his company. They’re the go-to for quality in their industry.
I’m sympathetic to unions, though, as many companies really are a terrible place to work, and employees need better representation in those situations. I just wish there was a better option than unions.
For the opposite perspective: One of my uncles worked a non-union construction job in the 50's. He died on the job. Another uncle, who watched my uncle die, never worked another non-union job in his life, choosing to go hungry rather than working a non-union job.
Yet I hear the situation is better in Germany. Also the US during the industrial revolution appears to have benefited greatly from unions. Any large organization is prone to corruption and bureaucracy for its own sake. I don't think we should throw out useful tools entirely because some have problems.
I don't know why it's different, but unions and employers are not terribly contrarian in Germany. For example, I have seen (edit: a works council, related to unions but not the same) argue for better quality control because they were fearing quality trouble, which would be bad for the whole company including employees. Unions also don't oppose laying off really underperforming employees (but might require a generous severance package) or automation, as long as affected people can be moved around instead of laid off.
Its like the saying that any form of government works well if everyone is altruistic. Maybe Germans or even western Europeans as a whole are just more altruistic than the US? Individualism and distrust of power are pretty core to the mindset of a decent portion of the US going back to colonial days. I'm not suggesting blindly trusting power is a great idea, but perhaps thinking that way, then acquiring power makes you more likely to abuse it.
I think "narrative" is probably the most underrated element in economic theory, probably because it's hard to measure. But it's easy to see: Many American CEOs appear to be only in it for themselves, and as you say US culture is very much individualistic: Always care for yourself first. Compare this to e.g. Japan where kids learn from very early age that everything you do, you do for the community. With these completely different mind-sets the style of cooperation is very different as well.
As a German I can also say that unions and Betriebsräte are not only looking for the employees but also looking that the business has a future. And that's a common ground with the employers, which is why there is not this kind of animosity as in the US. Also, as I said: Even managers in Germany know that the success of the company is a group effort.
Managers in the US largely are concerned about the next quarter earnings so they get their full bonus. This at the sacrifice of the business in the long term because they will have moved on. And unions usually span many states even support multiple sectors of industry, so the failure of a single business often doesn't seem to matter to the union.
AFAIK German unions are very diverse and workers can pick and choose which one they want to join, vs the US where it's typically a 1:1 relationship between workplace and union.
At the core of the German labor participation system lies the works council which is an (employee) elected board that represents them on a factory/office level (varies).
Large companies also elect a company wide works council which in the case of publicly listed companies is part of the board. (50% of the votes with a shareholder friendly tie breaking mechanism).
Works councils are traditionally dominated by unions but not always and there isn't a membership requirement to be represented.
Unions offer industry sector wide representation and also negotiate collective agreements that companies agree to (more or less) willingly and of course they coordinate strikes if need be.
Generally, yes. Detauls a bit more complex so. There are industry specific unions for employees, e.g. IG Metall for everything electronics and hardware or Verdi for public services (covering a staggering amount of jobs). On the othet side of the table you have associations of employers for the same industries. This makes, overall, negotiations straight forward, unions negotiate with employer associations and the results are then adopted, with regional modifications, acroos Germany. Of course employers are free to quit thosr associations, there are also dedicated agreements betweens unions and specific employers, usually covering things like extended working hours and so.
And we have specialized unions, e.g. Cockpit for pilots or the equivalant for train conductors. The latter is funny, because there is more than one union representing those at DB.
On a more general note, all employees benefit from the conditions negotiated between employers and unions (if there are any that is), regardless of union memebership. Legally, unions obly negotiate for members, technically rmployers don't make a difference. All that of course up to a certain salary sealing, everything above is outside union territory.
Ditto. Unions are just another lobby. They seek subsides, money, and power.
Unions, like companies and governments, exist mostly for themselves. That doesn't mean they don't mean well (sometimes), but trusting them shows a bit of naivety.
I hate them. They made me (and many others that I know) miserable.