3 ms·
I don't think anyone is arguing that you shouldn't freely associate. Facebook employees who want to collectively bargain should be allowed to. That's just free
by scarejunba 7y ago
I don't think anyone is arguing that you shouldn't freely associate. Facebook employees who want to collectively bargain should be allowed to. That's just free association. They just shouldn't be allowed to prevent other employees from not unionizing and working without the union.
And then, lots of people can choose not to unionize. Personally, I think few FBers will unionize.
And then perhaps you could negotiate percentage of gross revenue if you wanted. But they could choose not to give you that. So long as we have free association, that's fine.
Personally, I don't think "percent of gross" makes sense unless you're a founder and "percent of marginal gross" is near impossible to calculate so probably not that. I far prefer the market for labour and employment.
You know how people say "it's not that you can't find engineers; you can't find engineers at what you're willing to pay". Well, if you can find engineers, then all is well.
- unapologetic 7y ago> They just shouldn't be allowed to prevent other employees from not unionizing and working without the union. Yes they should. Repeal all right to work laws.
- throw_14JAS 7y agoHow do you justify taking away my right to choose where and how I work?
- unapologetic 7y agoYou're free to quit a union job whenever you want. Be part of the group or don't work here. My justification is that it drastically increases the strength of the union.
- throw_14JAS 7y agoStronger unions also have their issues. I strongly disagree that union-only shops should be allowed. While I may be free to quit a union job, it feels quite gangster to say that I have to participate in one to take a job. I don't think the tradeoffs -- benefits from a union versus costs involved, especially when it's exclusively to pursue a career at a specific company -- favor unions. That said, I do think unions could be stronger, and get a bad rap. To me, this seems like a problem the larger/stronger unions caused (and still cause - see police unions). Your language - "be part of the group or don't work here" - is also a major disincentive. Artificially created black and white scenarios are reductionist.
- stale2002 7y agoWhy would I quite my job, when I can instead try and sabotage the union, in whatever way is possible for me to do so? If they are going to screw me over, then I am going to screw them over first.
- TheCoelacanth 7y agoIf a union can't form an exclusivity agreement with a company, then all exclusivity agreements between any type of organization should be banned. That would be true freedom of association. Right-to-work laws just take away the right of workers to negotiate on the same terms that businesses do.
- scarejunba 7y agoOh no, I think they should have the right to negotiate an exclusivity agreement. And if the business takes it, so be it. I don't think they should be allowed to impose that agreement on the business through law. When you come here, I will scab you, and picket them if they consider signing exclusivity with you. And that's okay. You can picket them for the opposite and eventually one of us will win.
- TheCoelacanth 7y agoI am unaware of any way for a union to compel a business to become exclusive without an agreement as described here[1]. Can you provide a citation for this? [1] https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/employee-rights-book/chapter15-5.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/employee-...