3 ms·

>Union members have no incentive to leave the union except to save dues. If your dues are reasonable why would anyone leave? Because they can keep their dues?

>Union members have no incentive to leave the union except to save dues. If your dues are reasonable why would anyone leave? Because they can keep their dues? Why is anyone going to pay several hundred dollars for a group which they perceive is doing nothing for them? (this is in the situation where an employer is trying to bust the union by paying both groups the same) >Never. If I don't want to join a union, who are you to force me to join and steal money out of my paycheck to boot? If you read the rest you can see that you're not forced to join the union in the same way you're not forced to accept subpar pay. Just go work somewhere else.

pc86 8y ago
Someone could just as easily say "if you want to be unionized, go work somewhere else." That's not an acceptable answer then and it's certainly not an acceptable answer for you when explaining why you want to steal money from your coworkers.
- frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
  >Someone could just as easily say "if you want to be unionized, go work somewhere else." Well actually there's plenty of times when you literally couldn't go work for a union shop, there's not many left. >why you want to steal money from your coworkers. Actually in a shop with union members and free-riding non-union members it's the non-union members who are stealing. They are utilizing a public good (the power of collective bargaining) without contributing. In this sense making a workplace union compulsory is the best way to prevent workers from stealing from one another. Also introducing compulsory unions moves us from a situation where (1) employers have massively more bargaining power than a worker and workers are structurally compelled to compete against each other to one where (2) bargaining power becomes much more equalized and workers can collectively choose in which situations it is appropriate for them to compete with each other. Changing that compulsory union back into members only just moves us back to (1). It does this because it grants structural control back to the corporation and it's in the corporation's interest to make union bargaining power a non-excludable public good which introduces free-rider problems and destroys the union.

pc86 8y ago

Someone could just as easily say "if you want to be unionized, go work somewhere else." That's not an acceptable answer then and it's certainly not an acceptable answer for you when explaining why you want to steal money from your coworkers.

frgtpsswrdlame 8y ago
>Someone could just as easily say "if you want to be unionized, go work somewhere else." Well actually there's plenty of times when you literally couldn't go work for a union shop, there's not many left. >why you want to steal money from your coworkers. Actually in a shop with union members and free-riding non-union members it's the non-union members who are stealing. They are utilizing a public good (the power of collective bargaining) without contributing. In this sense making a workplace union compulsory is the best way to prevent workers from stealing from one another. Also introducing compulsory unions moves us from a situation where (1) employers have massively more bargaining power than a worker and workers are structurally compelled to compete against each other to one where (2) bargaining power becomes much more equalized and workers can collectively choose in which situations it is appropriate for them to compete with each other. Changing that compulsory union back into members only just moves us back to (1). It does this because it grants structural control back to the corporation and it's in the corporation's interest to make union bargaining power a non-excludable public good which introduces free-rider problems and destroys the union.