[The Red Zone]

Not sure where you get this "most."

Anyhow -- if one really is a believer of the gospel of a free trade, then one must affirm that wages must be allowed to rise as well as fall in response to shifts in demand for the work. And that includes permitting private unions.

[GeronL]

Not forcing workers to join them and then hand their dues over to political causes they disagree with. That is hardly something workers appreciate.

and wages do rise and fall with the market. A lot of factories moved from Japan to South Korea and then to China over the past few decades.

[goldstategop]

I'm in favor of free unions. If workers want to bargain collectively and enter into signed contracts with a company they should have that right. As long as the members choose their leaders and local shop stewards, I don't have a problem with it. Free unions represent a check on the excesses of Corporate America. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

(Denny Crane: "There are two places to find the truth. First God and then Fox News.")

[spinestein]

[if one really is a believer of the gospel of a free trade, then one must affirm that wages must be allowed to rise as well as fall in response to shifts in demand for the work. And that includes permitting private unions.]

I am and I do.

If I were an employer I would certainly permit private unions to exist among the employees if they wished, but I would not recognize them. In other words, no collective bargaining, and if any employee didn't want to join the union they wouldn't have to.

Of course, the unions would say this is unfair and that is not really "permitting" unionization but unions need to realize that they also have an ethical duty to "permit" non-unionized workers among them which they certainly don't do now.