3 ms·

I've asked about this before and have never gotten a clear answer. What legislated privileges are granted? A voluntary union could still collectively bargain. T

I've asked about this before and have never gotten a clear answer. What legislated privileges are granted? A voluntary union could still collectively bargain. They could all agree to make the same demand and all quit or strike if said demand is not met. That doesn't require federal law. I do believe there are some protections against companies firing everyone when they attempt to collectively bargain. Which is nice I guess. But not a requirement to form an effective union.

JoshTriplett 11y ago
> I do believe there are some protections against companies firing everyone when they attempt to collectively bargain. Which is nice I guess. But not a requirement to form an effective union. Part of the theory of a union is that the workers aren't easily replaceable as a group. Doubly so in that a company that is willing to fire N thousand people and hire replacements will likely have a harder time finding people willing to work for them. That seems sufficient to have enough bargaining clout, even with at-will employment.
s73v3r 11y ago
"A voluntary union could still collectively bargain." And as someone else said, the company can fire the person who brought the demands to them and tell the rest of them to fuck off and get back to work, or they're next.
- forrestthewoods 11y ago
  Perfect. Part of being a union means being willing to collectively strike. When the company fires one person the rest of the union needs to have the resolve to stop working. This forces the company to negotiate. Or if the company can trivially replace those workers that's fine as well. Not seeing anything here that requires legislative intervention.
  - s73v3r 11y ago
    So using the firing of someone to intimidate everyone else is fine by you?
    - forrestthewoods 11y ago
      I'd say it's as reasonable as workers collectively refusing to work to intimidate their employer.

JoshTriplett 11y ago

> I do believe there are some protections against companies firing everyone when they attempt to collectively bargain. Which is nice I guess. But not a requirement to form an effective union. Part of the theory of a union is that the workers aren't easily replaceable as a group. Doubly so in that a company that is willing to fire N thousand people and hire replacements will likely have a harder time finding people willing to work for them. That seems sufficient to have enough bargaining clout, even with at-will employment.

s73v3r 11y ago

"A voluntary union could still collectively bargain." And as someone else said, the company can fire the person who brought the demands to them and tell the rest of them to fuck off and get back to work, or they're next.

forrestthewoods 11y ago
Perfect. Part of being a union means being willing to collectively strike. When the company fires one person the rest of the union needs to have the resolve to stop working. This forces the company to negotiate. Or if the company can trivially replace those workers that's fine as well. Not seeing anything here that requires legislative intervention.
- s73v3r 11y ago
  So using the firing of someone to intimidate everyone else is fine by you?
  - forrestthewoods 11y ago
    I'd say it's as reasonable as workers collectively refusing to work to intimidate their employer.