Marty: Unions are a case of Jekyll and Hyde

In the
”
Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde,
”
published in 1886, Scottish author Robert Louis Stevenson
explores split personality
– opposites existing within the same being.
In the “Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,” published in 1886, Scottish author Robert Louis Stevenson explores split personality – opposites existing within the same being. Since then, the term “Jekyll and Hyde” has become common language meaning a person with very different characteristics from one situation to another.

I believe that definition can also apply to organizations and it’s a perfect description of America’s current union movement. The union movement is good and progressive while being bad and regressive at the same time – a classic case of split personality. When dealing with unions, the frequent question is who is going to show up, Dr. Jekyll or Mr. Hyde?

Unions are powerful political entities, not because they have so many members, but because they control a lot of campaign money and they do a good job of getting out the vote.  This can be especially critical to politicians at the state and local levels. In Hollister, the police and fire unions were decisive in supporting the Measure T tax increase and they ended up with substantial raises paid, directly or indirectly, with Measure T funds.

The same situation currently exists at the national level; the unions have a friend in the White House. Unions were strong supporters of President Obama’s candidacy and he’s been paying them back – as politicians of all stripes pay back their key supporters. The president went out of his way to ensure the unions got the best deal in the General Motors bankruptcy and he’s been reluctant to include some sensible tax provisions in healthcare reform because they are opposed by the unions. Both those positions have hurt his credibility with many middle-class Independents.

His latest pro-union move was to fire the opening shot of a trade war by imposing a 35 percent import tariff on Chinese-made tires. This position was strongly supported, some say instigated, by the United Steelworkers.

What I think of unions depends on the specific issues. There is nothing wrong with the principle of collective bargaining provided the decision is free of coercion from either side – labor or management. Promoting collective bargaining is a Jekyll, something good, but it’s obvious that we must ensure that it’s done freely.  However, some unions have been pressuring Congress to eliminate that cherished principle of the secret ballot. That will lead to intimidation and that’s definitely a Hyde.

When unions work for better conditions, training, safety, pay and benefits, that’s a Jekyll; when they take their demands to the extremes of featherbedding, non-competiveness, inefficiency and job protection at all costs, it’s a Hyde.

Like some misguided medical boards who believe that their primary duty is to protect physicians, some unions spend too much time protecting their members at all costs. In the public sector, this attitude costs the average taxpayer a lot of money that could be better spent. 

At least as worrisome is the lowering of standards and professionalism. Areas where unions should make a positive impact is enforcing tough standards of conduct among their own members and insisting on advanced training, not just longevity, for higher ratings. That would be a Jekyll; the strict seniority system is a big Hyde. While experience is important, other factors such as professionalism, ability, education and training are equally important.

Management may be just as bad or worse, but that has nothing to do with the issue. Unions are responsible for what they do, their member’s actions and the positions they take – that’s the correct attitude for professional organizations who care about the public interest, not just their own.

Marty Richman is a Hollister resident. His column runs Tuesdays. Reach him at cw*****@ya***.com.