4 ms·

I think trade unions are fine. The issue I have with unions relates to public sector unions like AFSCME that are able to have representation on both sides of th

by fixxer 10y ago

I think trade unions are fine. The issue I have with unions relates to public sector unions like AFSCME that are able to have representation on both sides of the negotiating table. Libertarians (of which I am not) are not against unions, they are simply pro freedom. Freedom means being able to assemble, but it also means not being compelled to assemble, especially when a portion of the dues are used to fund political action for policies they don't support. EDIT: autocorrect is horrendous

dannypgh 10y ago
I don't really understand why the idea of union shops bothers people. Freedom also means you can strike, walk-out, or quit your job if you want. Union shops exist because unions have the power to have everyone else walk out if someone is hired who isn't in the union. That's how the concept was originally created. (I think the formalism around modern elections, created by Taft-Hartley, is actually strongly anti-union but that's another matter) it therefore seems odd to argue that you should be free to work in a union shop without joining the union, with all of your union co-workers forced to not walk out in response. Or just speaking practically- a good union is democratic, and the democracy is much smaller - you can have more impact if you speak up- than the big democracy of the federal or state governments. So shouldn't taxes be a larger gripe than union dues? A portion of my taxes goes to fund all sorts of things I don't support.
- fixxer 10y ago
  No, you're missing the point. The issue is individual freedoms. You're talking about the benefits of collective bargaining and calling that freedom. It is in no way the same thing. I think the free rider problem you allude to is a result of union membership providing diminishing value. But again, the only part I really have an issue with are public sector. PS. You're not wrong about taxes, but let's not use debating fallacies please. We're talking about unions.
  - frgtpsswrdlame 10y ago
    >I think the free rider problem you allude to is a result of union membership providing diminishing value. No, free riders are a problem regardless of membership value. You say that you are for unions but you are against the only thing that allows unions to exist.
    - fixxer 10y ago
      I said I'm not against them. I never said I was for them either.
      - frgtpsswrdlame 10y ago
        Fair enough but my point is that in practical terms you are against them.
        fixxer 10y ago
        In practical terms, unions can't survive without destroying individual freedom. So they are bad.
  - dannypgh 10y ago
    The benefits of collective bargaining stem from the individual's freedom to withhold their labor. Or are you arguing it's somehow unjust for people to refuse to work with non-union coworkers?
    - fixxer 10y ago
      Compelling an individual to support a group runs against the concept of individual freedom. I support the right to form a union and the right to not join one. I do not support the right to require an individual to join. I support the individual. Pretty simple.
      - dannypgh 10y ago

by fixxer 10y ago

dannypgh 10y ago

I don't really understand why the idea of union shops bothers people. Freedom also means you can strike, walk-out, or quit your job if you want. Union shops exist because unions have the power to have everyone else walk out if someone is hired who isn't in the union. That's how the concept was originally created. (I think the formalism around modern elections, created by Taft-Hartley, is actually strongly anti-union but that's another matter) it therefore seems odd to argue that you should be free to work in a union shop without joining the union, with all of your union co-workers forced to not walk out in response. Or just speaking practically- a good union is democratic, and the democracy is much smaller - you can have more impact if you speak up- than the big democracy of the federal or state governments. So shouldn't taxes be a larger gripe than union dues? A portion of my taxes goes to fund all sorts of things I don't support.

fixxer 10y ago
No, you're missing the point. The issue is individual freedoms. You're talking about the benefits of collective bargaining and calling that freedom. It is in no way the same thing. I think the free rider problem you allude to is a result of union membership providing diminishing value. But again, the only part I really have an issue with are public sector. PS. You're not wrong about taxes, but let's not use debating fallacies please. We're talking about unions.
- frgtpsswrdlame 10y ago
  >I think the free rider problem you allude to is a result of union membership providing diminishing value. No, free riders are a problem regardless of membership value. You say that you are for unions but you are against the only thing that allows unions to exist.
  - fixxer 10y ago
    I said I'm not against them. I never said I was for them either.
    - frgtpsswrdlame 10y ago
      Fair enough but my point is that in practical terms you are against them.
      - fixxer 10y ago
        In practical terms, unions can't survive without destroying individual freedom. So they are bad.
- dannypgh 10y ago
  The benefits of collective bargaining stem from the individual's freedom to withhold their labor. Or are you arguing it's somehow unjust for people to refuse to work with non-union coworkers?
  - fixxer 10y ago
    Compelling an individual to support a group runs against the concept of individual freedom. I support the right to form a union and the right to not join one. I do not support the right to require an individual to join. I support the individual. Pretty simple.
    - dannypgh 10y ago