UAW Strikes Chrysler, Autoworkers = Musicians?
Isn't this a little bit like the UAW's position? It wants both: a) job security, and b) rising, above-market compensation.
1. If the UAW wants job security, it might have to give up wage increases, and might even have to accept falling wages. Just like stock prices, home prices, commodity prices and currency values rise and fall in response to changing market forces, the UAW would have to accept lower wages to maintain jobs when market conditions change. However, wages (especially union wages) are "sticky," meaning that they'll adjust upward easily, but won't easily adjust downward when market conditions change and demand for unionized labor falls.
2. If the UAW's priority is rising real wages/compensation, it might have to give up its position of maintaining job security, especially if rising wages are accompanied by rising productivity. Higher-paid and more productive, but fewer workers might be possible; but maintaining the same number of higher-paid and more productive workers might not be possible.
Bottom Line: Unlike the past, rising real union wages and union job security are mutually inconsistent positions in today's competitive, global marketplace. Like the message from the father above, "I'm sorry UAW, but you can't have it both ways."