4 ms·

Live and let live, right? Some people are leery about the possibility of their employer turning into a closed shop. I know I would not be happy if my employer

by Kalium 7y ago

Live and let live, right? Some people are leery about the possibility of their employer turning into a closed shop. I know I would not be happy if my employer suddenly turned into a union shop in a way that strongly affected me and gave me minimal choice in the matter. I only ask that you consider why people might choose to sit on the sidelines.

toomuchtodo 7y ago
Based on my experience, people sit on the sidelines because they're comfortable. People advocating for change should be polite first, and then not polite if politeness fails.
- Kalium 7y ago
  Is it at all possible, in any scenario, that people might have other reasons than purely personal comfort for sitting out a particular push for change?
  - toomuchtodo 7y ago
    It is possible, and I am receptive to enumeration of those reasons. One must be able to entertain both sides of an argument. Selfishly, it would help me strengthen my own argument.
- AnimalMuppet 7y ago
  So you plan to force me into accepting your position if I don't take it when you ask nicely? I'd say you're already not polite.
  - toomuchtodo 7y ago
    You already exist in a democratic system (assuming you're posting from the first world) where majority (mostly, some caveats) rules. This isn't any different. Everyone gets a vote, not everyone gets their way.
    - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
      Not quite. I live in a republic. The majority wins elections but still don't get to totally trample on the minority, because we have a limited government. Now, a union election isn't a government election, so that doesn't totally apply. But, for example, the majority has decided to pass legislation that makes my current state a right-to-work state, so a union can't require me to be a member, even if they win the election. Of course, unions could campaign to change that law. But that's a different set of elections they'd have to win...
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]

by Kalium 7y ago

toomuchtodo 7y ago

Based on my experience, people sit on the sidelines because they're comfortable. People advocating for change should be polite first, and then not polite if politeness fails.

Kalium 7y ago
Is it at all possible, in any scenario, that people might have other reasons than purely personal comfort for sitting out a particular push for change?
- toomuchtodo 7y ago
  It is possible, and I am receptive to enumeration of those reasons. One must be able to entertain both sides of an argument. Selfishly, it would help me strengthen my own argument.
AnimalMuppet 7y ago
So you plan to force me into accepting your position if I don't take it when you ask nicely? I'd say you're already not polite.
- toomuchtodo 7y ago
  You already exist in a democratic system (assuming you're posting from the first world) where majority (mostly, some caveats) rules. This isn't any different. Everyone gets a vote, not everyone gets their way.
  - AnimalMuppet 7y ago
    Not quite. I live in a republic. The majority wins elections but still don't get to totally trample on the minority, because we have a limited government. Now, a union election isn't a government election, so that doesn't totally apply. But, for example, the majority has decided to pass legislation that makes my current state a right-to-work state, so a union can't require me to be a member, even if they win the election. Of course, unions could campaign to change that law. But that's a different set of elections they'd have to win...
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]