re: #275 Talking Point Detective

I assume that your point is that it is possible for the leadership to act in the best interest of the members even if their incentives are “misaligned?”

Ok, I guess that’s true. But certainly you seemed to be suggesting that the leaders were not working in the best interests of the members. Otherwise, I’m really struggling to figure out your point. Was your point that union leaders are “often” so noble that they do what’s in the interest of their membership even when it isn’t in their own (the leadership’s) best interest?

I was merely pointing out one of the oddities of the system that can cause disfunction. I would say that I was suggesting that leaders may not work in the best interests of the members because of an incentives problem. I think, when looking at labor interactions it’s important to look at how everyone’s interests are aligned. If we can figure out better ways to align interests we can figure out better solutions. I never said I had the solution, I was just raising what I’ve long found to be an interesting conundrum. How to ensure that people are incentivized to work for long-term benefits when facing short-term risks. People on the thread seem to have read into what I said that I was condemning all unions or somehow anti-labor which is not the case.