Labor Strikes: Game Theory, Labor Movements and Industry

Strikes appear to be rising as of late and there are likely many explanations and reasons. Scientists and economic gurus are looking at it analyzing different causes and outcomes (Philosophies of Labor and Work).  Each has their own philosophical school but I will say that as incomes at the top rise it would make intuitive sense that incomes in labor would rise as well. Unions are a bi-product of those economic factors because effort and wages are sometimes not in direct connection. 

Craftsmen, Tomb of Nebamun and Ipuky

1390-1349 BCE

Ancient Art of Organized Labor

The other issue is worker participation and their feeling of being part of the bigger picture. While money seems to be the main cause of labor strikes (vs. working conditions) in recent times it is associated with many other sociological activities across industries. People want to feel part of the overall system and want to feel they can make a contribution. Disconnection to society has consequences from a sociological labor perspective.

To me, it isn't a pro or anti union issue because those factors are not central to the need to increase human capital and improve upon worker innovation (They are different avenues of making that happen but not central) Technology implementation and human capital development can be fostered by labor unions or they can from outside labor unions (policy issues and perspective of shared benefit.). Unions were created to protect labor and this appears to be a similar factor coming into play during increased labor behaviors (Think about that and why that happened in the past and why its happening now. There are historical industry and global reasons why that could be occurring.)

The issue is how we see workers and how as society develops workers are part of the bigger purpose and process. For example, if I'm a CEO who just earned $10 million more this year should some of that benefit of work also be allocated to labor? Up and down (Right now it appears to be a desire for up. Labor unions made concessions when industries declined and feel wages are too sticky upward). I create great ideas and manage large systems so I should earn the rewards of that but so should the people that enacted and enhanced those strategies (Many companies fail because of strategy implementation and not necessarily the quality of that strategy. Failure can occur from a unit level supervisor and labor level because of a lack of buy in to the strategy and organization.)

Likewise, I hope workers feel that the success of the organization and our collective societal benefit rests much on what they are doing. They are a valuable part of economic machinery and in general to societal growth. Rewarding innovative actions, training, and productive longevity in an organization makes a difference. The more a person contributes and increases organizational value, the more valuable they become through actualized performance so as to foster human capital development (no difference between labor and management on this function. See above.)

Whether labor unions grow or not, the ultimate goal should be to improve the industry and improve the lives of all Americans. Investors have a big part in building our society because they often manage the capital and that capital can best be managed by improving the fundamentals of the economy, the industry, and its total broad benefit (Taxes, wages, opportunity, poverty reduction, etc.). Increasing the flow of benefit and performance can limit the conflict (i.e. base pay with quick increases for human capital development, technology tool learning and general contributory ideas and outcomes.)

Organizations are in effect collectives of people and effort....we have become removed from that closeness of perspective in modern times and it impacts our decision making (big theories versus human to human exchange. How many executives and labor workers have worked in both areas to gain a full perspective?). Treat everyone like family and share fairly in the collective outcomes (and pain) and we will all benefit through new ideas and shared perspectives on the value of individual and group performance. We all benefit from broad based economic engagement and human capital development.

Being on higher on the organizational hierarchy where responsibilities rise should come with higher pay but to what extent should that outstrip workers based on comparative input? There will be long term issues if the top and the average become too removed from each other (See CEO Pay Up and Down) 

Should we expect labor and other movements to create upward pressure? Would technology implementation and greater human capital development improve the whole system as a net positive in the digital era (AI, wearable tech, robotics, etc.)

What I would like to see is industries grow and the benefits to be widespread in a capitalistic way. Tell me something new and ask me tomorrow and I might change my mind. Labor vs Management or Labor & Management 

A few pieces on notes and ideas:

Falling wages and unequal income distributions could be a major catalyst for strikes. Why are workers striking now? 

Indication that strikes before the 80's obtained 5-10% improvements but have not been as effective in non union environments. Economic Outcomes of Strikers in an Era of Weak Unions 

You may also consider the economics of trade unions and how it benefits workers but remain open on its benefit to industry. The Economics of Trade Unions. as well as the Power Model of Labor Movements

There are different types of strikes and the National Labor Relations Board has some guidelines on what is lawful and what is not lawful. The Right to Strike

Game theory also makes its way into some of the decisions through economic leveraging. Game Theory and UAW Strikes and Game Theory and Nash Equilibrium.