4 ms·

Paraphrasing that economic philosopher Inigo Montoya ... You use that phrase "negotiated voluntarily" ... I do not think it means what you think it means. Righ

by hpcjoe 8y ago

Paraphrasing that economic philosopher Inigo Montoya ... You use that phrase "negotiated voluntarily" ... I do not think it means what you think it means. Right to work laws limit the power of unions to form labor monopolies, opening up the market for labor. You may form a union or not. You may join one, or not. But you can no longer coerce someone to pay dues/fees for something they do not wish to associate with. That is, fundamentally, the breaking of a monopoly over labor. Everyone has an inherent right to negotiate on their own if they so choose. Or not, they can join the union if they so choose. But they are no longer coerced into funding activity that they may not wish for on their own behalf. Right to work does exactly what it says on the label.

TheCoelacanth 8y ago
"Right to work" makes it illegal for unions to form exclusivity contracts with businesses. That denies them the ability to freely form contracts that every other type of organization is allowed. If a business wants to hire people who aren't part of a union, then they shouldn't have signed a contract saying that they won't.
- hpcjoe 8y ago
  This is incorrect. Right to work, prevents a monopoly on labor that a business must consume via a union, from using its power to preserve its monopoly. Previously, businesses, even if opposed in principle to a union forming, had little recourse but to deal with the labor monopoly once formed. NLRB specifically went after businesses opposed to union formation, or who wished to purchase labor on the free and open market. They had little choice in signing of the contracts. Blaming them for acquiescing to unreasonable demands in order to avoid further material harm ... isnt ... a win, for anyone. This specific action, that unions so happily crow about, costs employers more. Which drives them to look at investing in new sites where costs are lower, and automation. You are seeing exactly this in the rush to $15/hour areas.

by hpcjoe 8y ago

TheCoelacanth 8y ago

"Right to work" makes it illegal for unions to form exclusivity contracts with businesses. That denies them the ability to freely form contracts that every other type of organization is allowed. If a business wants to hire people who aren't part of a union, then they shouldn't have signed a contract saying that they won't.

hpcjoe 8y ago
This is incorrect. Right to work, prevents a monopoly on labor that a business must consume via a union, from using its power to preserve its monopoly. Previously, businesses, even if opposed in principle to a union forming, had little recourse but to deal with the labor monopoly once formed. NLRB specifically went after businesses opposed to union formation, or who wished to purchase labor on the free and open market. They had little choice in signing of the contracts. Blaming them for acquiescing to unreasonable demands in order to avoid further material harm ... isnt ... a win, for anyone. This specific action, that unions so happily crow about, costs employers more. Which drives them to look at investing in new sites where costs are lower, and automation. You are seeing exactly this in the rush to $15/hour areas.