Morally just to outlaw labor unions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maxirad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
As I recall labor unions were illegal at one time. They were considered a restraint on trade. At that time these were merely voluntary organizations which had no legal power. While this might have been unjust the current system is equally unjust. Unions should not have an legal standing. They should not be able to force membership and they should not be able to restrict labor.

All the stories I’ve heard and direct knowledge I have of unions paints a bad picture. My grandfather was threatened into joining one. My father was briefly threatened for not being in the union until the agitator realized he was my grandfather’s son. It reminds me of government. We’ll protect you from these bad guys and if you don’t want our protection we’ll hurt you as bad as they would.

I have no problems with free organizations. But unions you’d be stripped of all coercive power.
 
AKDee said:
Nice try, but no. My unwillingness to do your research for you is not proof that such things haven’t happened. They happen in my city annually. I’m simply unwilling to do something that I know you are capable of doing yourself, as you clearly have a computer and therefore access to google. I’m not your research assistant. I’m someone you are trying to debate despite my lack of interest in debating you.
Click to expand...
You made the claim. The onus is on you to back it up. If you offer no proof then we can assume you’re talking hot air. If it is as prevalent as you claim then it should only take you a minute (literally) to find multiple examples and link to them. Boom… you’ve won that debate.

Assuming you know the difference between public and private. I’m not sure you do.
 
AKDee said:
Both my parents retired from the public sector. They didn’t make huge salaries (although their salaries were respectable) but my Dad retired with over $2M in his retirement fund. Not sure on what my mom’s fund was, but the bottom line is they retired younger than most private sector employees can retire and with a lot more money and they had free healthcare for life to boot.

As to doing your research for you on public sector strikes, I’m not going to do that. I think you are focusing on federal employees (who cannot strike) but not state or municipal employees (who can). Additionally, you seem to be rather set in your opinion, as am I. There is little point in us debating when neither of us are likely to change our minds.

Peace.
Click to expand...
I don’t have a problem with strikes where they are legal. But binding arbitration is a better solution to dead-locks. This is where an arbitrator sometimes a panel of them decides what is fair. There are certain restraints on their power and among other things they have to consider ability to pay when making their decision.

It’s worked fairly well though some arbitrators do make irrational decisions. The example I’m thinking of was more about his perception of public opinion. Than any evidence presented or in fact reality. Eventually arbitrators like this no longer get cases and they move on to something else I guess.

ATB
 
unstoppable_II said:
You aren’t going to do it because there are no examples, and you know it. You are the one who didn’t distinguish between federal v. state and local employees, not me. I have the benefits book, and nowhere does it say they get free health care for life. Where did you get that one? E-rumor?

If government employment were such a great deal, have you taken advantage of the opportunities?
Click to expand...
First, just so you know where I’m coming from, I’m very much pro-labor and pro-union.

That said, public sector employees can and do strike. I’ve lived through a couple of transit worker strikes here in New York City. It happens. In my state, there is a law (the Taylor Law) that prohibits work stoppages by municipal unions. Nevertheless, they do strike, from time to tome. Sometimes an amnesty is negotiated as part of the contract discussions, but sometimes union leaders will actually go to jail for calling a strike.

Also, some government employees do get lifetime health care as a retirement benefit. My father is a retired federal government employee, and he has lifetime (and very good) health insurance. In fact, he had very good benefits all during his employment. And the health insurance is wonderful. My father’s wife (my stepmother) was very, very sick in the last couple of years of her life, and my father’s benefits allowed her to stay at home and receive in-home care, rather than spending her final months in a hospital. And now that my father’s health is failing, we (his children) are very happy that he has good insurance, and will be able to have in-home care or afford an assisted living facility, if that’s what’s needed.

My mother was a New York City schoolteacher (although she did not live to reach retirement age). She too had spectacular benefits, including good leave, which allowed her to take time when each of her children was born. I have to thank her unionized job for that. And, a generation back, her father’s unionized blue-collar job, which allowed him (an immigrant) to own a home and send all four of his children to college.

Both my mother and father received lower salaries than they would have in the private sector, given their credentials, abilities and educational achievements (my mother had an M.A., my father a J.D.). But they did have great benefits.
 
Another thought. I have a question for those who are opposed to unions (and I’m thinking of private-sector unions here):

Why is that you’re perfectly OK with the owners of an enterprise (i.e., stockholders or shareholders or interest holders) organizing themselves and electing a board of directors to represent them and set policy, and hiring law firms and consultants and the like, but opposed to workers organizing themselves and electing people to represent them (the union leadership) and hiring law firms and consultants and so on?

Seems to me that what’s permissible for one side ought to be just fine for the other side.
 
unstoppable II
You gave no examples of where the union actually added value.
HR already has a clear process for documenting and firing people and in your case the union had no choice but to side with you. However, I expect grievance complaints put a damper on management taking action in numerous other cases. The net result is a more inefficient, less effective govt.
unstoppable_II said:
So, you see, unions are not all bad.
Click to expand...
 
In CA, the public unions own the legislature. Is that the public unions fault, or the legislature’s fault, or the voter’s fault for continuing to elect representatives who provide these benefits to the union workers?
 
styrgwillidar said:
In CA, the public unions own the legislature. Is that the public unions fault, or the legislature’s fault, or the voter’s fault for continuing to elect representatives who provide these benefits to the union workers?
Click to expand...
Which is precisely why in WI the public unions’ powers have been limited.
 
rmartensjr said:
Which is precisely why in WI the public unions’ powers have been limited.
Click to expand...
Yes, the voters elected representatives they thought would better represent the public’s interest in negotiations with the union.

Roosevelt opposed government worker unions because he saw the danger of politicians playing with other folks money using it to curry favor with a block of voters/interest group. That politicians wouldn’t have the same concerns about long term financial interests/profitability as commercial sector.

Folks who get upset with unions need to keep in mind that their negotiating counterparts are equally to blame. Whether it’s the management at GM/Ford/Chrysler or politicians— they’re supposed to be the balance between what the unions want and what is in the best interests of all the folks they’re representing…
 
styrgwillidar said:
(Pres. Franklin D.) Roosevelt opposed government worker unions because he saw the danger of politicians playing with other folks money using it to curry favor with a block of voters/interest group.
Click to expand...
Precisely!!!
 
AKDee said:
I think it would morally just to outlaw public sector employees from unionizing. Public sector employees are paid with tax dollars. When they unionize and strike for higher wages/benefits (generally far higher than that which would be paid in a similar job in the private sector) they are extorting taxpayers. I am not okay with that.

Private sector employees should be allowed to unionize…but private sector employers should retain the right to fire them all and replace them with non-union employees if the union doesn’t manage to find a balance between the needs of the employer and the wishes of the employees.

Overall I think unions are anachronistic- a throwback to the days before we had labor laws which protected life, safety, and rights of employees as well as laws which mandate minimum pay, maximum hours, etc. Essentially I think unions exist now only out of greed.
Click to expand...
As bad as unions got in the US, the minute you outlaw them, business will go right back to the sweat shop era, and sweatshops will be legal again.
 
esieffe said:
As bad as unions got in the US, the minute you outlaw them, business will go right back to the sweat shop era, and sweatshops will be legal again.
Click to expand...
LOL, I guess you haven’t hear of OSHA or the myriad of other laws and regulations we implement since the start of the industrial age.

It’s a pity Unions lost their way after addressing initial legitimate needs.
 
esieffe said:
As bad as unions got in the US, the minute you outlaw them, business will go right back to the sweat shop era, and sweatshops will be legal again.
Click to expand...
I guess you don’t read labels on your clothing? If it says ‘made in China’, it’s sweatshop conditions…
 
Public sector unions suck because Government does not know how to negotiate and always give away the farm,

Private sector unions are the reason why OSHA and a myriad of other laws and regulations exist - hundreds if not thousands of people were killed trying to obtain these rights - so quickly forgotten - the ones who were killed are the real working class heros.
 
hu324b said:
Public sector unions suck because Government does not know how to negotiate and always give away the farm,
…
Click to expand...
Government politicians have an interest in obtaining votes and support for campaigns in terms of labor, messaging, advertising etc.

They can buy the support of the Union, not just the votes of the members, but support of all the machinery that goes along with the organization- feet in the street, flyers, advertising, speakers etc etc. giving away a farm they don’t own. Always easy to be free with other people’s money…

Agree on private unions. They didn’t just arise because workers were bored, there were very real issues which motivated people to organize to improve conditions. It’s why union membership cycles, things get fixed, the union starts to take on a life of its own and pursuing issues not directly related to the workers. then the Union reps/bureacrats start getting paid a lot… Workers start to wonder why they’re paying such large dues to support a bureaucracy which is pursuing those interests, folks leave the union. If conditions in the workplace deteriorate, the union hopefully goes back to focusing on those, workers see the union as relevant and membership grows again, until things are fixed and…

Folks who want to blame private sector unions need to also blame the management negotiating team as well. Car companies didn’t have to provide benefit packages which would be unsupportable in the long term-- they were short sighted in considering how economy could change and consequences of defined benefit plans. Unions make demands in their interests-- but they don’t want to bankrupt a company-- management needs to represent companies interest. Both sides need to compromise on what will keep the company profitable while adequately compensating the workers.
 
Maxirad said:
No offense, but public-employee unions have been an issue in recent years. Would it be morally just for a government to outlaw the formation of labor unions? I realize that Pope Leo XIII issued an encyclical in 1891 known as Rerum Novarum, but…
Click to expand...
Only if we can forbid for the outlawing of the Chamber of Commerce and other business associations. LOL.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top