Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Doctor 2Brains
Unions can ONLY!!!! exist because of government force applied selectively against private property owners (evil rich people),

This is simply not true. There is reason for collective bargaining, even from the perspective of the employer; else companies like ManPower and ADP would not exist. The factory owner would rather not deal with personnel details.

There were real problems before the union movement that primarily stemmed from abuse of the courts via the Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific interpretation of the 14th Amendment of corporations as persons. People without money had no recourse in civil cases against such large entities.

The real problem with unions is monopoly power. If we restructured the NRLA such that unions were corporations competing in the business of supplying skilled labor, a lot of these problems would vanish.

From what I can tell, you don't think free association is an unalienable right.

14 posted on 11/19/2012 11:28:42 AM PST by Carry_Okie (The Slave Party: advancing indenture since 1787.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Carry_Okie

What has ManPower and ADP got to do with unions? I don’t see any connection.

Santa Clara, 14th amendment, civil cases, NRLA, unions = competing corporations???? Smokescreens.

How’s this for a solution — If I am on your private property, your rules apply. Period.


16 posted on 11/19/2012 11:40:55 AM PST by Doctor 2Brains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: Carry_Okie; Doctor 2Brains
Unions can ONLY!!!! exist because of government force applied selectively against private property owners (evil rich people),

This is simply not true. There is reason for collective bargaining, even from the perspective of the employer; else companies like ManPower and ADP would not exist. The factory owner would rather not deal with personnel details.

Unions in their current form would not exist without government force applied against property owners. That does not imply that there would not be any form of collective bargaining. Trade guilds could engage in collective bargaining to the benefit of both workers and employers, if such guilds were in a position where their continued existence relied upon their ability to do so. If a trade guild refuses to accept or retain members who are not good workers, employers who hire workers from the guild would likely pay extra for doing so, but might find it easier to get quality workers than if they search for workers outside the guild. Of course, the more tolerant the guild is of bad workers, the less advantage employers would see to hiring them, and the less money the guild would be able to demand for its workforce.

One thing that I wish more people would realize is that the real battle isn't between workers and employers, whose interest substantially overlap. The real battle is between union workers and non-union (actual or prospective) workers.

36 posted on 11/19/2012 3:54:22 PM PST by supercat (Renounce Covetousness.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson