Chiming in because I've worked dozens of jobs in many different fields, and I've also worked directly for a large union.
My opinion is that if you can figure out a good work agreement with your employer that satisfies both of you without needing to unionize, that's usually the best of both worlds.
Unions generally help in cases where an organization is so big that management isn't able to address the needs of all the employees due to their being so many of them. They also come in handy in fields where the work is inherently dangerous or specialized and certain specific needs are required. Finally, in cases with tradesmen who might work for multiple people in shirt time spans, where it's not feasible to draw up specific work agreements for every single job, Unions can help.
Unions are also notorious money-sinks due to the extra administrative loads required, they also can become corrupt and disproportionately help certain workers while not benefiting others. I've been screwed over by both employees as well as unions during my career; there are often good eggs and bad eggs in both camps.
In sum, nothing wrong with unionizing, but it's not always the best move for a worker.
This is a fair assessment.