Organised labour job losses are at the heart of a renewed debate about whether American unions, which enjoy record public support, ultimately destroy more employment than they create. The argument has sharpened this Labour Day, as polling and corporate collapse combine to present an uncomfortable picture for union advocates.
Record Approval, Shrinking Membership
The paradox is stark. A Gallup annual Work and Education poll conducted in August found 71% of Americans approve of labour unions, with a record-high 47% wanting unions to have more influence, the highest proportion in 25 years. Union approval has only exceeded the current level twice in Gallup’s 90-year trend: in the mid-1950s, when it reached between 73% and 75%, and in the initial 1936 measure, when it stood at 72%.
Yet membership tells a different story entirely. According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), the overall union membership rate stood at 10.0% of the workforce in 2025, little changed from the previous year. The earliest comparable BLS data, from 1983, put the rate at 20.1%, with 17.7 million union members; by 2025, that figure had fallen to 14.7 million workers, even as the total labour force expanded substantially.
Public-sector unions account for a disproportionate share of what remains. The BLS recorded a public-sector union membership rate of 32.9% in 2025, more than five times the private-sector rate. Critics argue that government-sector unions operate in a uniquely protected environment: the bodies they negotiate with face no competitive pressure and cannot go out of business, which insulates unions from the market discipline that has eroded private-sector membership.
Organised Labour Job Losses: The Yellow Corporation Case
The collapse of Yellow Corporation illustrates the critique in concrete terms. Once the third-largest US trucking firm specialising in less-than-truckload freight, with customers including Walmart, Home Depot, and Uber Freight, Yellow shut its operations and filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in August 2023.
The company’s SEC filing stated that losses arising from delays in implementing its ‘One Yellow’ restructuring plan had reached more than $137 million in adjusted EBITDA by that summer. Yellow had also filed a lawsuit against the International Brotherhood of Teamsters on 26 June 2023, citing breach of contract and loss of enterprise value.
Federal court documents show the business collapse led to the termination of approximately 3,500 non-union employees on 28 July 2023 and approximately 22,000 union employees on 30 July 2023, according to bankruptcy court findings. Some reports placed the total job losses at around 30,000; the court documents indicate the combined figure was approximately 25,500.
The Teamsters’ own General President, Sean M. O’Brien, offered a pointed assessment of Yellow’s management: ‘Yellow has historically proven that it could not manage itself despite billions of dollars in worker concessions and hundreds of millions in bailout funding from the federal government,’ he said, as reported by Reuters. That bailout funding included a $700 million pandemic-relief loan extended to Yellow in July 2020 under the CARES Act, in exchange for which the federal government received a nearly 30% equity stake in the company, according to CNBC.
The collapse raises a question neither side finds easy to answer: did union contract demands fatally weaken a company already struggling under $1.3 billion of debt, or did management failures render the union’s position irrelevant? Probably both.
Safety, Innovation, and the Rules That Bind
Beyond Yellow, critics point to structural problems with union contracts as a class. Longshoremen’s union leaders complained that dangerous port conditions had resulted in 17 members being killed, yet simultaneously sought to block the introduction of automated cranes that would have reduced those hazards. American ports remain less automated, and less productive, than many international competitors as a result.
The broader argument is that uniform work rules, negotiated for entire bargaining units, constrain individual flexibility. A worker who wishes to negotiate longer hours for higher pay with a willing employer cannot easily do so when the collective agreement sets the terms for everyone. Managers in unionised shops must navigate layers of contractual obligations before implementing operational changes, slowing the pace of adaptation in competitive markets.
The historical record carries weight too. In 1914, Colorado Fuel and Iron Co. enlisted the National Guard to suppress a strike, resulting in the deaths of 25 people. That violence underpins the moral case for collective bargaining. Whether that case still justifies current union structures, in a labour market where workers have far greater access to information about alternative employers and where the BLS data show membership continuing to erode in the private sector, is the question that will shape the next round of Gallup polling.
