That's the funniest thing you have said.....so how do you explain all the people who have lost everything or at least a huge slice of their super or is that the certainty of outcome that you mentioned...?
Easy. They purchased ownership in a company. They didn't purchase a AAA rated sovereign backed bond (although technically that isn't even a 100% probability of a given return on equity). They wanted ownership in a company, and someone else wanted to no longer own a company. Both parties benefited.
Oh I understand all to well....as I said if it wasn't for the actions of unions people would still be working 17 hours a day in the mines...
A complete misnomer. "Union gains" have been only attributed because a union was involved. Union achievement is not the cause. If a company needed to pay a higher market price for labor a union was "seen" to have made that gain. This is not a new phenomenon, it's as old as doctors using the hippocratic oath as a restriction of labor practices / agreement of the division of labour. The original stated ""I will not cut persons laboring under the stone but will leave this to be done by men who are practitioners of this work.". An agreement between physicians and surgeons.
Let me explain what unions do.
Your union argues and through the threat of industrial action gains a 5% higher wage rate than would otherwise have been the case. This causes the airline to hire less workers in that field (if any good costs more then the amount sold is less than would otherwise be the case). As a result there are workers who would otherwise have been employed by the airline.
These employees seek other employment. Obviously they can't obtain employment in careers that require higher qualifications so they shuffle down into the best paying job below their desired employment. This chain continues down until you hit the minimum wage level resulting in those with the least professional qualifications being pushed out of a job due to those who would otherwise have been employed at a higher level.
Your union is about gaining you, a union member, a wage above that which otherwise would be the case in a free market. That comes at the expense of those at the bottom of the employment ladder as those who miss out on employment in your field move down the scale.
Sure, you are pursuing your own financial self interest, but to lecture others on greed when it is your own self interest costing the poorest in society employment is overreaching your argument.