[THEUPMAN]

Something that seems to be missing from the discussion ...

He is searching his employees, of course they must consent or br fired.

That seems to be a bit off the edge to me.

Can he decide that no one who owns a gun can work there?
Can he decide that no one who votes republican can work there?
How about ... if you don't shop at the company store? ..

There is some coercion going on here, I agree that it's his company and he should be able to run it as he see fit. But the reality of the times ... our economic evolution since the turn of the century has left an awful lot of power in an awful few hands.

I think there is a dynamic working here that shows us we need to address the position of corporations ect.. in relation to public and private policy.

The fact is ... most people are vulnerable to the edicts of their employer ... yes, theoretically they can go do something else ... but so often that is not really the case.

Indentured servitude ... slavery ... should people be able to sell themselves?
Basically that's what's being discussed here. Can a man sell his freedoms, thusly, can one man buy (with a paycheck) an other mans liberty.

Are the limits to contractual obligations that can be incurred ... especially when there is the coercion of the invisible hand?

[Mulder]

Can a man sell his freedoms, thusly, can one man buy (with a paycheck) an other mans liberty.

Good points in your post. The answer is "no". Sam Adams has a quote to that effect which I'll post tonight.

[glabbe]

If he wanted to be consistent he would test the employee's family. If they smoke it impacts the health care cost just as much as if the employee smokes.

[sandbar]

>>>Basically that's what's being discussed here. Can a man sell his freedoms, thusly, can one man buy (with a paycheck) an other mans liberty. >>>

Exactly!

[P_A_I]

Indentured servitude ... slavery ... should people be able to sell themselves?
Basically that's what's being discussed here. Can a man sell his freedoms, thusly, can one man buy (with a paycheck) an other mans liberty.
Are the limits to contractual obligations that can be incurred
... especially when there is the coercion of the invisible hand?

There are indeed limits, -- Constitutional limits, on the 'powers' the employer has over the employee.

Simply put, [unless an employee's behavior off the job seriously affects performance on the job], the employer is Constitutionally obligated to respect the employee's rights to life, liberty & property.

If the employer objects to the restrictions placed upon him by our Constitutional system, he is free to move his business elsewhere.
-- I hear Mexico still allows a master/peon relationship.

[Mulder]

Here's that quote from Sam Adams I referenced earlier:

“In short, it is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one, or any number of men, at the entering into society, to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights; when the grand end of civil government, from the very nature of its institution, is for the support, protection, and defence of those very rights; the principal of which, as is before observed, are Life, Liberty, and Property. If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of Almighty God, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave.”