Article critique and analytical review

Labor unions are organizations that lawfully represent workers in many industries across the economy. They offer workers collective bargaining with their employers on issues such as wages, employment benefits as well as working conditions. Labor unions as well represent their members in the event that they are in disputes with their employers over violation of provisions provided for in contract agreements. In the United States, majority of the labor unions are allied to one of the two larger umbrella unions, the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations and the Change to Win Federation. This trend of labor unions in the United States merging to form larger unions' dates back to the late 1970s and in the recent past has been multi-jurisdictional (Moody, 2009).

In this regard, the article 'The Direction of Union Mergers in the United States: The Rise of Conglomerate Unionism' by Moody Kim published in the British Journal of Industrial Relations examines the root of this trend of merging. It as well examines the effectiveness that merged labor unions achieve in regards to finances, organizing as well as collective bargaining. In light of this, this paper seeks to analyze the aforementioned journal article while expressing my point-of-view that the merging of labor unions does not make them effective in championing their main course of collective bargaining.

Analysis of the journal article

Kim in the article argues that the influential factor influencing the merger of unions is the sharp decline in union membership that has persisted since 1954. A recent survey undertaken by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics indicates that the level of unionization in the country stands at 12.4% of all workers. This represents a significantly low level of unionization in the country and has profound effects on the existence of unions. One significant effect of this decline in membership is the fact that it places huge financial strains on labor unions. This is in the sense that unions finance their activities through contributions made by their members thus a reduction in membership signifies a reduction in the contributions made to the unions (Moody, 2009).

However, considering the manner in which unions acquire their finances, the merging of unions dies not make them effective financially. This is in the sense that merging ensures that a wide array of workers contribute to one union thus increasing the revenue that that union collects. However, such a union has increased financial needs owing to its increased size. In this regard, the merging of union does minimal effect in influencing the effectiveness of unions in regards to their finances. In relation to union power and collective bargaining, the merging of unions is conventionally deemed to increase their power of collective bargaining. However, this is not the case as the merging of union into larger unions only increases their collective bargaining power on a national scale (Moody, 2009). This has influenced larger unions such as the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations to delve in politics owing to the nationalist outlook and representation.

However, this does not address the core course of labor unions of offering collective bargaining for their workers. This is in the sense that larger unions do not have the capability of collectively bargaining to the needs of smaller workers. For instance, it is difficult for a large union to offer collectively bargaining for the needs of a small portion of its member who do not form a significant portion of its members. This has significantly influenced the decline in the membership of unions as their merging limits their ability to serve the needs of each of its members. In essence, the merging of smaller labor unions into larger labor unions does not enhance their effectiveness in championing their course (Moody, 2009). This is a view expressed in the findings draws by Kim in his examination of the issue and is as well my viewpoint.

The rationale behind this argument is the fact that the merging of smaller labor union into larger ones increases their scope of operation. This implies that the larger unions are not in a position of addressing some diminutive needs that are vital to some of their members thus making some of its member feel left out and influencing the continued decline in union membership. The increase in the scope of operation of larger unions as well increases their financial needs thus creating a financial strain on the unions and their members. This eventually reduces their effectiveness (Moody, 2009).