Unionization more prevalent in government than private sector

One of the biggest changes in the union movement has happened mostly under the radar, but it has big consequences for union officials, workers and the public at large. Unions used to be powerful in the private sector. But now, most union workers nationwide are government employees. It has been this way since 2009. Since...

One of the biggest changes in the union movement has happened mostly under the radar, but it has big consequences for union officials, workers and the public at large.

Unions used to be powerful in the private sector. But now, most union workers nationwide are government employees. It has been this way since 2009.

Since 2000 unions have lost more than 2 million members in the private sector nationwide, but gained more than 200,000 members in government. Something very similar happened in Illinois, with union membership holding steady in government while membership dropped by 244,000 in the private sector.

With a long history of private-sector unionism, Illinois hasn't quite reached that point yet, but the gap has narrowed to almost nothing. Government union members could outnumber private-sector union members as early as this year.

With the shift to government unions has come a shift in union officials' priorities. Union bosses and lobbyists have long had sympathy for tight regulation of the economy and an activist government, but now they have a direct interest in the growth of government – that's where their members are, and that is the most likely place for them to find new members.

At the same time, union officials have much less reason to worry about the state of the private economy. For government unions, an economy that fails to grow is not a pressing concern because they can press for tax increases to make up any lost income and preserve government programs that employ their own members. This is a big part of why government unions – but not private sector unions – have been major backers of the progressive tax hike push.

The rise of government unions also has implications for health care. A few months ago many unions – almost all of them private-sector based groups such as the Teamsters, the Food and Commercial Workers, and the Laborers registered a number of complaints about ObamaCare. Government unions, such as the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees or the big teachers unions, however, have been much less vocal about the "Affordable Care Act." The Service Employees International Union, which represents many government employees, is one of the few unions that remains unabashedly in favor of the law. Government unions can be blasé about the imploding health-insurance marketplaces because governments are in a better position to pay whatever is needed to maintain quality insurance than almost any private employer is.

Because unions now represent more government workers, they are less likely to bargain with businesses that are seeking to maximize profits and more likely to bargain with politicians who want to maximize their support. The temptation for politicians will always be to trade taxpayer money for union support.

Finally, all unions have an interest in protecting their members from discipline. In the case of government, that means that unions make it harder for taxpayers to identify the people who enforce laws and run taxpayer-supported social programs, or hold government workers accountable for their actions. (Here's one example of where that can lead.) The inevitable result is a less transparent government, something that should be a concern for all of us – conservatives and liberals alike.

Union expansion into government has been going on for 30 years, and this trend is unlikely to change on its own. Unions have changed themselves. Illinois citizens need to pay attention to the changes in the union establishment. The old storylines, and the old sympathies for working men and women who once battled against big corporations, no longer apply.