From today's New York Times comes this gem of info:
For the first time in American history, a majority of union members are government workers rather than private-sector employees, the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced on Friday.

In its annual report on union membership, the bureau undercut the longstanding notion that union members are overwhelmingly blue-collar factory workers.  It found that membership fell so fast in the private sector in 2009 that the 7.9 million unionized public-sector workers easily outnumbered those in the private sector, where labor's ranks shrank to 7.4 million, from 8.2 million in 2008...

According to the labor bureau, 7.2 percent of private-sector workers were union members last year, down from 7.6 percent the previous year.  That, labor hisotorians said, was the lowest percentage of private-sector workers in unions since 1900. 

Perhaps private sector is beginning to wise up and realize unions today aren't what they used to be and most of them are more self-serving than representative of members and put undue burdens on employers and the workforce as a whole.  Too bad the government continues to tighten the grip of unions:

Among government workers, union membership grew to 37.4 percent last year, from 36.8 percent in 2008...

Fred Siegel, a visiting professor of history at St. Francis College in Brooklyn and a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative research organization, said, “There were enormous political ramifications” to the fact that public-sector workers are now the majority in organized labor.

“At the same time the country is being squeezed, public-sector unions are a rising political force in the Democratic Party,” he said. “They depend on extra money for the public sector, and that puts the Democrats in a difficult position. In four big states — New York, New Jersey, Illinois and California — the public-sector unions have largely been untouched by the economic downturn. In those states, you have an impeding clash between the public-sector unions and the public at large.” …

Noting that union members generally have higher earnings, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis said in a statement: “As workers across the country have seen their real and nominal wages decline as a result of the recession, these numbers show a need for Congress to pass legislation to level the playing field to enable more American workers to access the benefits of union membership. This report makes clear why the administration supports the Employee Free Choice Act,” a bill that would make it easier to unionize.”

Nice try, Madame Secretary.  Union workers are not paid more on average because their work is worth more than private sector employees.  The high wages of union workers are artificially inflated through collectively bargained legal contracts.  Passing the Employee FORCED Choice Act would only expand the unions' power and, gee... mean more slush funds for the Democrat Party.  But I'm sure that has nothing to do with the real reason the Obama administration supports it...