[r-q-tek86]

I have a friend who is a big ol' flaming liberal... nearly a Marxist. He always throws the "unions as a means to ensure a safe workplace" argument at me. I'm not sure of the answer.

**SPOILER ALERT**

I don't think that life as described in the next few chapters is any more realistic than the worker's paradise view from the collectivists. I concede the need for unions when that balance of power tips too far toward management's favor. But how is management protected when the balance shifts the other way?

[Still Thinking]

I have a friend who is a big ol' flaming liberal... nearly a Marxist. He always throws the "unions as a means to ensure a safe workplace" argument at me. I'm not sure of the answer.Explain that some freedom (to negotiate independently, etc.) is being traded for the safety, then go Franklin on him and say that people who would willingly trade away freedom to get safety deserve, and will get, neither. Does this guy seriously think that in today's safety obsessed world, where you have to wear a helmet to take a piss, getting rid of unions would lead to unsafe workplaces? If he has a sense of humor and you've made the point that unions trade freedom for safety, you might even say that since we all know the dial has been twisted FAR too far toward safety, abolishing unions might help restore the balance!

[stylin_geek]

If you know the job you are taking is dangerous, then, why is the company responsible? Did the company force you to take that job? Did they put you in chains and drag you unwillingly into serfdom?

If you have two competing companies offering identical wages, yet, one has a much better track record when it comes to safety, they’ll have no problems getting employees.

The less safe company will, more than likely, get the marginal employees and eventually go out of business.

Unions, as they’re currently constructed, would never have come about if big business wouldn’t have been in bed with government.

Government is supposed to play the neutral judge when it comes to companies and employees.

Instead, turn of the century companies had the implied backing of government.

[jongaltsr]

A true union would be a group of workers who worked for common good which insured their employment and working conditions. What we have for "Unions" today is not this.

What we have is a self serving managers who serve "Their" positions as overseers who claim to represent you while protecting ONLY their positions. How else can you get the results that they produce.

Do any of them ever get laid off - while many of the "actual workers" do eventually get laid off or terminated?