Right to work?

[eatsnopaste]

I have an idea. I'd like to know what all you union guys think about it.

Since the labor force can all join a union and work out deals with different companies based on a central organization, what do you guys think about all the business owners who hire the same kinds of employees joining together and bargaining collectively with the union?

So all the construction companies could form an organization or all the auto companies, and their representatives could bargain with labor's representatives. Just as all the employees are represented by one entitity, all the employers could be represented by one entity.

Wouldn't that be fair?

up to a point. If all construction companies were setting wages and benefits the smaller companies would not be able to match the big guys, therefore the big guys would adopt the lower pay scales. The larger companies would make more money by utilizing the colluded lower rates and by doing so enable them to buy out the smaller companies. When there weren't any small companies left they could set whatever scale they wanted...kind of sounds like Walmart doesn't it?

 

[88GT]

And to think I can't even say "most companies charge X percentage commission for their real estate services" without facing potential accusations of collusion.

 

[RockofStrength]

never been in a union. you shouldn't be made to join a union or pay dues if you are working in a union shop. However if you decide NOT to pay dues then you should have to negotiate your own wage scale and benefits and not receive the union package. If this was so, a very small few might get a better deal but I would guess than the vast majority would be making less than the union members and of course would have no recourse over any work regulations that the company forced on the employees. Think they won't cut corners to pay their stock holders...think again. think they won't skirt safety rules to make a shipment?...think again. Think they won't lay you off so they can hire a new guy at half pay? think again.

Uh...welcome to the market? Welcome to business, which is intended to make money? "Look at those greedy buggers, hiring a cheaper employee to do the same job I do at a reasonable level of competence! I should negotiate with my union to make sure that they can't replace me instead which is in no way greedy and is instead the pinnacle of righteousness and justice!"

 

[edporch]

-Snip-
How about the rule of freedom? What if a company owner didn't want unionized employees? Is it just to force him to accept them? Why can't he just fire them all?
-Snip-
Quote:
Originally Posted by edporch
I say "a good thing" only because I believe in the Rule of Law.

The law says workers have a right to Unionize (Wagner Act) and the law says states have the right to pass Right to Work laws (Taft-Hartley Act).

Rule of Law should apply to BOTH sides.

How about the rule of freedom? What if a company owner didn't want unionized employees? Is it just to force him to accept them? Why can't he just fire them all?

I agree.

But at this point in time, we're forced to operate under Wagner and Taft-Hartley (and countless others).

When the Wagner Act of 1935 was signed into law by President Franklin Roosevelt, it was with the idea to give UNSKILLED laborers some position to bargain from.
Which the motive at least makes sense, because in the BALANCE of things, a worker with marketable skills ALREADY had a position to bargain from.
i.e. if a business owner wants the BEST skilled workers, they have to pay them what they're worth, and the market should be allowed to decide the pay rate.

 

[flagtag]

The purpose of business is to reward capital investment. Calling it gBureed demonstrates not only a total lack of understanding of the purpose of business but an unreasonable level of jealousy.



If it sucks so bad why do you work there?

As to the cheap thing, see my previous comment.

I work there because I work in an area that has and is losing jobs because of the corrupt state government. There are very few hires anywhere in my county. (Although, there are "reports" that another grocery store going to open soon. Businesses just won't stay here.) BTW: Obama started here.

When unions do it it's called looking out for the little guy and it is revered. When business does it it's call colluding to set market prices for a product and that's illegal.

Bet you get no takers.

It's not the actual job that I don't like, it's management - which I avoid as much as possible. I just do it my way. I actually love my job. (I work with special ed. kids) But, as "they" say, a job is a job. (It's not like in the 1970's when one could walk out of one door into another instantly.)

 

[dross]

up to a point. If all construction companies were setting wages and benefits the smaller companies would not be able to match the big guys, therefore the big guys would adopt the lower pay scales. The larger companies would make more money by utilizing the colluded lower rates and by doing so enable them to buy out the smaller companies. When there weren't any small companies left they could set whatever scale they wanted...kind of sounds like Walmart doesn't it?

If this is the model that worked with Wal Mart, why do they charge such low prices?

And isn't your scenario exactly what unions do with the sale of labor?