Here's what the Apple Glasgow retail store union negotiated for itself

"The agreement and union is a significant win for staff, as other Apple Stores haven't been so lucky. For example, the St. Louis Galleria Mall Apple retail store abandoned its attempt to unionize in November, blaming the company's opposition to such attempts.”

That’s a damned lie. It has been verified by journalists that not enough employees were willing to join and the effort therefore failed. The union involved falsely spun it as illegal pressure from Apple.

“guarantee pay equity and fairness” which means everyone gets the same pay whether they work hard or not. There’s no incentive to work hard, to go the extra mile for the customer at all which is the hallmark of unionism. One self-dedicated worker may do 80% of the work while five others do 20% but they get the same paycheck. I know because I actually worked in such an environment. The managers knew who worked and who was just there to collect a paycheck, so guess who they assigned the tough jobs to knowing those jobs would get done?

Unfortunately, unions cannot help themselves but push for demands / benefits that are out of touch with reality. If it was just about pay and being reasonable, I’d support unions but I have yet to find one that does not end up taking the ….. 
Give a tiny bit and their greed kicks in. Shame as the original intent of unions was positive and made great changes but with so many work place laws these days, they are almost redundant.
I have seen union cause jobs loses for the very thing they were supposed to help prevent.

Watch out! Lots of doom and gloom wailing can be expected from the No Bill of Rights for Workers’ Americans. 

Apple invests a tremendous amount to build out and operate a physical store.  It would seem proper that they would then have the lion's share of control over the operations that go on within that store, including authority to determine pay and benefits. 

radarthekat said:

Apple invests a tremendous amount to build out and operate a physical store.  It would seem proper that they would then have the lion's share of control over the operations that go on within that store, including authority to determine pay and benefits. 

What doesn't seem proper to me, and this is my issue with unions, is that a disproportionate amount of control should find its way into the hands of a group of people who have relatively little invested into the store or at risk with regard to the total cost of the store and its ongoing operation.  Unionized workers ability to shut down an entire store under certain conditions seems way out of proportion to their investment in the design and engineering and corporate decision and management processes required to have brought such a sophisticated operation into existence, to keep it supplied, to do all its marketing and to develop its efficient management and operations plan.  

Workers provide valuable service to an Apple Store, but that value is compensated via the pay and benefits they agreed to when they took the job. 

Perhaps I am naive (I'm sure I'll be educated here by some posters if I'm not seeing this clearly), but it just seems to me that unions sometimes wield disproportionate power relative to their contribution of required investment to establish and feed an enterprise such as an Apple Store.  

Seems to me that their right to vote with their feet, combined with the protections of the labor and workplace safety laws, is adequate balance on their side of the ledger.  

I never worked in any unionized business.  My high school diploma meant that I started out in a $6.50/hour job, in 1985, and it was through my contributions that I climbed the ladder to one day become co-founder and VP of product development of my third startup.  Perhaps this colors my views, which are that you gain the power to make changes and wield authority by moving up through the ranks.  My years of military service prior to 1985 may also have colored my view.  You get it when you earn it, not by banding together to revolt, in a manner of speaking. 

/rant

In fairness i never saw it from the other side….

from my perspective, when the boss turns up in a new mercedes s-class with all the bells and whistles then claims he cant afford to pay staff more than minimum wage… really enrages me, and makes me want to fight back, as without the workers working for minimum wage, the business would grind to a halt and he wouldnt be able to afford that car, his 5 bed detached house and acres of land or anything else, im not saying he shouldnt benefit from building a business, he absolutely should, but why should i be driving a 16 year old car, struggling to put food on the table while he changes his brand new car every year when i am one of the people making him so much money…

He should slow down his spending a bit and give us a pay rise so we can afford to live a bit more comfortably, i doubt it would hit his living standards too bad if he gave us all an extra few quid per hour….

it goes both ways, we have no union, but i feel if we did we might be able to get a better deal