I was IG Metall. As a young person it felt a little restrictive but now I feel it strikes a good balance. You make good money, no abusive workplace practices and the companies are also successful. Win-Win for everybody.

Those of us who are Americans sorely need to rediscover general strikes and practical labor unions that don't go crazy with organized crime or utopian politics. Oklahoma was a socialist bastion, Henry A. Wallace got the DNC Bernie Sanders-treatment, strikers of the 19th century were summarily executed by Pinkerton and hired snipers like it was a prison riot, and decades of strikes/strike breaking and unionization helped usher in a brief post-WW2 era of prosperity. Now, poor and white-collar Americans argue unthinkingly and constantly for austerity, mindless deregulation and giving more money to only the rich (because of manufactured consent). I don't see how there's anything but misery, fear of major disease and destitution for 75-90% of Americans; and there aren't many good jobs for average workers because there's almost no manufacturing ecosystem like there is in China.

Generally speaking, workers councils are a good thing. In praxis, it depends. The main issue I have is, that sometimes worker councils are more looking at the workers council's interests then employees or the company's. Same for trade unions. I have had cases where workers councils blocked hirings to reserve a job ticket for one of there own because of the higher salary. Ignore the fact the guy was 100% council member and not at all qualified. Or where the council wanted one guy from middle management elected because that would have raised salaries for the whole council.

Good thing, so, is the collective bargaining power. That usually increases salaries, in some industries more than in others, and improves overall working conditions.

So I'd say it depends. Especially on the people on both sides of the table. Maybe every company has the council it deserves.