The Communications Workers of America is at fault for this situation, since they refuse to fight or cooperate with the progressive movement against the people screwing them.  This is Art Brodsky's recount of a hearing in Maryland, where CWA sucked up to Verizon against their own interests.

Once upon a time, CWA was an independent, strong voice for consumer interests. That era ended in 1995 during the deliberations over the Telecom Act. The union at that point became, from the public policy standpoint, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Bell companies, a role they maintain to this day. In their Maryland testimony, Ron Collins, administrative assistant to the vice president of CWA District 2, put it right out there. The union opposed the bill because it would put company investment at risk, and thus put jobs at risk. He was also careful to note what a wonderful employer Verizon was because it provides health care to its workers. According to CWA's written statement: "Bills such as HB 1069 would cause the loss of good jobs with health care and other benefits in the state of Maryland."

Michael Dean, the president of the Maryland CWA state council, piled on by saying that Verizon provides "good paying jobs" laying fiber and he, too, didn't want to put those jobs at risk. (Of course, CWA's witnesses somehow didn't get around to testifying that they endorsed the part of the bill calling for reporting of broadband deployment.)

CWA is happy to lie about net neutrality and will do anything to please its corporate employers.  And of course, Verizon's Seidenberg turns around and stabs them in the back.  I really think they ought to reconsider their stance here.

I will also point out that Verizon's legacy of horrible service (and no, FIOS does not always get you 50M, it sometimes gets you as little as 5), which could be blamed on management, is in fact turning back against the union.  

I bristle at self-inflicted wounds by the progressive movement and labor.  And this is one of them.