LRI INK: Workers United Fail, Union vs. Non-Union Wages, Browning-Ferris

- Tweet0
- 0
- Pin It 0
- 0
- Subscribe to RSS
Subscribe

Subject: LRI INK: Workers United Fail, Union vs. Non-Union Wages, Browning-Ferris

February 26, 2026

To visit the blog post, click on the link below the article.

What Unions Hope You Won't Notice About What the BLS Report Shows On Wages

by Kimberly Ricci

Every year, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics releases its annual Union Members report. Predictably, unions always point toward choice figures as evidence to fuel organizing campaigns. Of course, that’s never the whole story. BLS states as much.

In this year’s report, one statement of interest is as follows: “Among full-time wage and salary workers, union members had median usual weekly earnings of $1,404 in 2025, while nonunion workers had median usual weekly earnings of $1,174.”

Here’s the BLS disclaimer that also points toward illustrative tables: “The comparisons of earnings in this news release are on a broad level and do not control for many factors that can be important in explaining earnings differences.”

The BLS is warning against apples-to-oranges comparisons. The data in Table 2 shows how workers’ age, sex, and race are contributing factors in earnings differences, whereas Table 4 focuses on industry. Specifically, we’ll discuss industry comparisons in this article (as our own Phil Wilson did a few years ago while discussing manufacturing workers’ wages in relation to a myth spread by UAW organizers).

To be clear, no “union premium” or “advantage” exists on wages between non-union workers and union members. In fact, the contrary can be argued for this BLS data broken down by sector and occupation instead of using aggregates that explain nothing or, worse, mislead workers.

1. Wholesale Trade: Union wages collapsed while non-union wages surged

Year over year, union member wages in Wholesale Trade dropped from $1,158 in 2024 to $978 in 2025. That’s a $180 per week decline. However, non-union wages moved in the opposite direction, reaching $1,202. That's a $224 per week non-union advantage in distribution for food and beverage, pharmaceutical and medical, consumer goods, building materials, and electronics.

2. Software, Data and IT Roles: Non-union workers earn $380 per week more

In Computer and Mathematical occupations, non-union workers earn $2,045 per week, compared with $1,665 for union members. In a separate report, the bureau projected this to be one of the fastest-growing employment fields through 2034, so of course unions will target these workers without admitting that workers would likely fare better without their representation.

3. Finance and Professional Services: Non-union workers lead in every subcategory

The pattern is clear in non-union over union workers, including Finance and Insurance with $1,603 vs. $1,358 and Professional and Technical Services with $1,882 vs. $1,772.

4. Legal Occupations: Non-union workers earn around $10,000 more per year

Non-union legal workers earn $1,984 per week versus $1,791 for union members. This $193 weekly gap adds up to $10,036 per year and spans roles from attorneys to paralegals and legal support staff.

5. In sectors that appear close, the math on dues isn’t pretty:

In Retail Trade, union members earn $908 versus $913 for non-union workers. Monthly union dues deductions widen that gap even more.
In Telecommunications, non-union wages of $1,512 already exceed union wages of $1,431 before dues, and the gap grows larger when dues hit.
And in Manufacturing, the story is slightly changed this year. Union members earn $1,340, versus $1,237 for non-union workers, but dues of 1-2% of gross wages reduce that $103 gap by nearly half before any other factor is considered.

Conclusion: Union membership doesn’t pay for anybody but unions

When you look past media headlines and union rhetoric, the same government data unions use in organizing campaigns tells a more complete story. Non-union workers across several industries and occupations consistently come out ahead. For employers, that's a government-sourced response to one of the most common claims your workers will hear from organizers.

Blog Post

Browning-Ferris Is Back. Again. And This Time, The NLRB Had No Choice

by Michael VanDervort

If joint-employer law feels like a bad rerun you never asked for, you are not imagining it.

Last week, the National Labor Relations Board issued yet another decision in the case that refuses to fade out: Browning-Ferris Industries and Leadpoint Business Services, formally docketed as Case 32-CA-160759.

This was not a policy flex. It was not a regulatory reset. It was compliance.

What actually happened

Following instructions from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, the Board reaffirmed that Browning-Ferris Industries was a joint employer of workers supplied by Leadpoint at its California recycling facility.

Why? Because the court told the Board to apply the Browning-Ferris framework on remand. Full stop.

That framework allows joint-employer status to be found based on reserved authority or indirect control over essential terms and conditions of employment. The Board did not voluntarily revive this standard. It applied it as the law of the case.

Why this case still matters

This is the case that blew the joint-employer door open in 2015. It is also the case that has been appealed, reversed, rewritten, narrowed, expanded, and remanded more times than most HR teams care to count.

The result is a decade-long reminder that joint-employer exposure is not governed solely by the rule currently posted on the Board’s website. It is shaped by the courts, the facts, and the procedural posture.

Even when the Board changes direction, old cases stay alive.

What this decision does not do

This decision does not replace the 2020 joint-employer rule as the Board’s general standard. Outside this case, the current formal regulation still applies.

But pretending this decision is irrelevant would be a mistake.

When the Board is forced to apply a broader test in the most famous joint-employer case on the books, employers should take note. Courts can and will require a different analysis when the facts demand it.

The practical lesson for employers

If your organization relies on staffing agencies, contractors, franchise relationships, or layered employment models, this decision is not academic.

Joint-employer risk does not hinge only on daily supervision. It turns on contract language, reserved rights, operational influence, and how much control you keep in your back pocket, even if you swear you never use it.

This case is a reminder that “we do not exercise that authority” is not the same thing as “we do not have it.”

Bottom line

Browning-Ferris never really left. It got complicated. It picked up a lot of procedural baggage.

But as this decision shows, the broader joint-employer theory is still very much in play when courts are involved. Employers who assume the issue is settled are betting against a case that has already outlived multiple Boards, multiple rules, and multiple political cycles.

History suggests that it is not a great bet.

Quick Update (2/26/20260): The 2020 Joint-Employer Rule Is Back

Separately from the Browning-Ferris litigation, the National Labor Relations Board has formally reinstated its 2020 joint-employer rule after a federal court vacated the Biden-era 2023 standard.

The move is procedural. Because the 2023 rule was struck down before taking effect, the Board restored the prior regulation as the operative standard.

Bottom line: under the 2020 rule, joint-employer status requires substantial direct and immediate control over essential terms of employment. Indirect or unexercised authority alone is not enough.

Blog Post

The Next 52 Weeks: Cultivating Performance

by Michael VanDervort

In this episode of the Left of Boom show, Phil Wilson of LRI Consulting Services and Mike Perkins of Frontline HR discuss the critical role of frontline supervisors in providing performance feedback.

They explore the importance of training supervisors to effectively communicate with employees, the flaws in traditional performance review processes, and the necessity of regular feedback and encouragement. The conversation emphasizes the need for accountability, emotional intelligence, and the impact of positive reinforcement on employee engagement and workplace culture.

Takeaways

Frontline supervisors are crucial for employee engagement.
Training is essential for supervisors to provide effective feedback.
Regular feedback should be prioritized over annual reviews.
Positive reinforcement is key to maintaining morale.
Accountability must be a two-way street between leaders and employees.
Avoiding difficult conversations can lead to bigger issues.
Performance reviews should not be a surprise to employees.
Emotional intelligence is vital for effective leadership.
Encouragement can significantly improve employee performance.
Supervisors should document feedback throughout the year.

Chapters

00:00 Introduction to Performance Feedback
02:57 The Importance of Frontline Supervisors
05:51 Training Supervisors for Effective Feedback
08:56 Creating a Positive Feedback Culture
11:52 The Flaws in Traditional Performance Reviews
14:50 Regular Communication and Accountability
17:52 Encouragement and Recognition in Leadership
20:43 Handling Low Performers
23:54 The Role of Emotional Intelligence in Leadership
26:54 Final Thoughts on Supervisory Practices

Podcast

Workers United Fled A Grocery Chain And Still Has No Starbucks Contract. See The Pattern?

by Kimberly Ricci

Workers United thought they were setting the labor relations world on fire in December 2021 when baristas in Buffalo, NY became the first to unionize at Starbucks. The SEIU affiliate has since won 683 elections against the coffeehouse giant, which only adds up to roughly 4% of the 16,864 U.S. locations that Starbucks counted at the end of fiscal year 2025.

Even more tellingly, the union hasn’t reached a first contract at Starbucks. And if you look beyond this campaign, the full picture of Workers United's organizing isn’t terribly impressive. While focusing on Starbucks, they’ve strayed from their bread and butter of hospitality and commercial laundry worker organizing. Since 2020, their non-Starbucks wins have been embarrassingly thin and include one Ben & Jerry's scoop shop as well as single locations at Perks Cafe, Good Karma Cafe, and Image Comics.

Workers United’s recent track record also includes a newly failed effort to unionize an independent grocery chain close to their first Starbucks win.

Workers United Meets A Family Grocer

In July 2025, workers at Dash’s Market, a four-store, family-owned grocery chain in Buffalo, filed for a union vote at all locations. The bargaining unit contained 575 workers, and the resulting media blitz grew contentious. Owner Joe Dash spoke with the Buffalo News about his belief that he had inadvertently hired several workers who were “salts,” who purposefully applied for their roles with the intent of organizing coworkers from within.

Workers United denied those accusations, although their claim is impossible to take seriously since the union has relied upon salting at Starbucks. Their most notorious salt, Jaz Brisack, even went on a publicity blitz to promote their book about infiltrating Starbucks and spreading the union’s agenda. These tactics at Dash’s Market ultimately did not work.

Not without trying, though.

The local NBC affiliate aired a “both sides” style news segment that showed two opposing groups of Dash’s Market workers brandishing signs. The union activists got the first word in that segment, but a sizable group of workers also made clear that they did not support the union and stood with owner Joe Dash. In doing so, one worker expressed fears that unionization would “negatively affect our store in the whole" while another spoke at length about Dash’s generous PTO policies and other perks.

Six months later, Workers United quietly withdrew their petition, a sure sign that they lacked confidence in their ability to win.

What Workers United’s Recent Pattern Shows

The union that built its reputation on a national campaign against a global coffee brand couldn't sustain an organizing drive at a four-store family grocer, and employers should understand why.

Workers United's tactics rely on turning employees against employers that they frame as distant and out of touch with workers’ concerns. Even though they argue that those conditions exist at Starbucks, the campaign has only succeeded at 4% of locations. And at Dash's Market, the union’s approach fell apart quickly. Joe Dash knew his people, engaged directly, and a meaningful portion of his workforce backed him. The union withdrew, and Workers United’s narrow playbook is starting to speak for itself.

Blog Post

About Labor Relations INK

Labor Relations INK is published weekly and is edited by LRI Consulting Services, Inc. Feel free to pass this newsletter on to anyone you think might enjoy it. New subscribers can sign up by visiting here.

If you use content from this newsletter, please attribute it to LRI Consulting Services, Inc. and include our website: http://www.LRIonline.com

Contributing editors for this issue: Greg Kittinger, Michael VanDervort, and Kimberly Ricci.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to receive our labor relations newsletters and updates. You can manage your email preferences by clicking the link at the bottom of any of our email communications.

About LRI Consulting Services, Inc.

LRI Consulting Services, Inc. exists to help our clients thrive and become extraordinary workplaces. We improve the lives of working people by strengthening relationships with their leaders and each other. For over 40 years, LRI Consulting Services, Inc. has led the labor and employee relations industry, driven by our core values and our proven process, the LRI Way.

Share

Subscribe

Subject: LRI INK: Workers United Fail, Union vs. Non-Union Wages, Browning-Ferris

Conclusion: Union membership doesn’t pay for anybody but unions

What actually happened

Why this case still matters

What this decision does not do

The practical lesson for employers

Bottom line

Quick Update (2/26/20260): The 2020 Joint-Employer Rule Is Back

Workers United Meets A Family Grocer

What Workers United’s Recent Pattern Shows