3 ms·

Collective bargaining takes away my right to bargain for certain agreements for myself. That is definitely a free market restriction on my rights as a worker,

by stale2002 5y ago

Collective bargaining takes away my right to bargain for certain agreements for myself. That is definitely a free market restriction on my rights as a worker, to have a mutual agreement with that specific company.

CyanBird 5y ago
> Collective bargaining takes away my right to bargain for myself But it doesn't, you can choose to not be part of the union
- stale2002 5y ago
  No, you missed the point. The union puts a limit on the contracts that I can make with the company. So I would be prevented from bargaining for certain contracts with a company. So me and this other company's mutual right to make an agreement would be limited by the union.
  - tovej 5y ago
    These limits are in your favor, you are free to negotiate contracts within the limits. I fail to see how the right to work for less pay than what others see as the absolute minimum fair pay is a right that's worth keeping. This is a bit like saying that criminal law takes away your right to be mugged, beaten, and murdered.
    - stale2002 5y ago
      > you are free to negotiate contracts within the limits. So then I am not free to negotiate, and me and this other company right to engage in a mutual agreement are prevented. Yeah, that's my point. > I fail to see how the right to work for less pay I get paid way way way more money than the average unionized tech worker, where they exist. So actually, my ability to negotiate for myself, outside of the restrictions of a union, has worked out pretty darn well for me. > the absolute minimum fair pay Oh that's funny. You aren't aware that union contracts cover much more things than just a minimum wage. The whole point is that many union provisions can be bad for many people and are not strict benefits for workers.
      - tovej 5y ago
        Minimum pay was an example, collectively bargained contracts offer other protections as well, but these differ more from case to case, so I didn't bring them up. I have also negotiated my pay up, but under the umbrella of collective bargaining agreements. As far as I know, you are always able to negotiate your pay up. This has worked pretty well for me as well.
        stale2002 5y ago
        > but these differ more from case to case Ok... and thats my point. Certain union provisions are bad, for many people, and you cannot pretend that they are a universal good. > you are always able to negotiate your pay up Non-union jobs in tech pay way way more, than most union tech jobs though, and union provisions prevent certain contracts that many workers would prefer. So the actual, measurable facts show that I and many others, in non-union jobs, are doing way better than most unionized tech workers.
- nate_meurer 5y ago
  In the US, unions fight hard to take that choice away from people. "Right to work" laws in many states allow people to opt out of union membership and fees. Unions hate these laws and fight relentlessly to get them overturned.
  - heavyset_go 5y ago
    "Right to work" laws force unions to represent workers who are not union members. The truth is that no one is forcing you to work a union job.
    - erik_seaberg 5y ago
      A union is free to negotiate a contract that only applies to their own members, they just prefer not to so they can prevent non-members from competing using more favorable terms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members-only_unionism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members-only_unionism
    - nate_meurer 5y ago
      > The truth is that no one is forcing you to work a union job. That's pretty disingenuous. Try working for government at any level without also working for a union. I could turn your argument around and say, "if you want a union job just go find one!" Regardless, that choice you speak of represents a profound injustice according to union leaders. The ultimate goal of mainstream political labor movements is universal unionization. They would very much like to make it so that everyone is forced to pay union dues, no matter where they work.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
heavyset_go 5y ago
> Collective bargaining takes away my right to bargain for certain agreements for myself. No, they don't. Actors are able to negotiate themselves and with the help from their union, and they're all members of SAG-AFTRA.
- stale2002 5y ago
  > and they're all members So, in other words, their rights to bargain and engage in mutual agreements is restricted. You literally just explained how their rights are limited. Specifically, it is limited in that you have to be a part of this group, to engage in certain agreements. And even within that group, people are prevented from engaging in certain mutual agreements.
  - heavyset_go 5y ago
    > So, in other words, their rights to bargain and engage in mutual agreements is restricted. You can negotiate without union representation. You're also free to be a non-union actor.
    - stale2002 5y ago
      > You can negotiate without union representation There are limits on the contracts that I could engage with, with another mutually interested party, is the point. If there were no limits, then, almost by definition, it would not be a union. So yes, a union puts limits on the contracts that mutually interested parties can engage in. Were you not aware that unions put limits on the contracts that mutually interested parties can engage in? Did you think that a company, and an interested worker, could just completely ignore union rules, and create their own contract, that conflicts with the rules of the union?

CyanBird 5y ago

> Collective bargaining takes away my right to bargain for myself But it doesn't, you can choose to not be part of the union

stale2002 5y ago
No, you missed the point. The union puts a limit on the contracts that I can make with the company. So I would be prevented from bargaining for certain contracts with a company. So me and this other company's mutual right to make an agreement would be limited by the union.
- tovej 5y ago
  These limits are in your favor, you are free to negotiate contracts within the limits. I fail to see how the right to work for less pay than what others see as the absolute minimum fair pay is a right that's worth keeping. This is a bit like saying that criminal law takes away your right to be mugged, beaten, and murdered.
  - stale2002 5y ago
    > you are free to negotiate contracts within the limits. So then I am not free to negotiate, and me and this other company right to engage in a mutual agreement are prevented. Yeah, that's my point. > I fail to see how the right to work for less pay I get paid way way way more money than the average unionized tech worker, where they exist. So actually, my ability to negotiate for myself, outside of the restrictions of a union, has worked out pretty darn well for me. > the absolute minimum fair pay Oh that's funny. You aren't aware that union contracts cover much more things than just a minimum wage. The whole point is that many union provisions can be bad for many people and are not strict benefits for workers.
    - tovej 5y ago
      Minimum pay was an example, collectively bargained contracts offer other protections as well, but these differ more from case to case, so I didn't bring them up. I have also negotiated my pay up, but under the umbrella of collective bargaining agreements. As far as I know, you are always able to negotiate your pay up. This has worked pretty well for me as well.
      - stale2002 5y ago
        > but these differ more from case to case Ok... and thats my point. Certain union provisions are bad, for many people, and you cannot pretend that they are a universal good. > you are always able to negotiate your pay up Non-union jobs in tech pay way way more, than most union tech jobs though, and union provisions prevent certain contracts that many workers would prefer. So the actual, measurable facts show that I and many others, in non-union jobs, are doing way better than most unionized tech workers.
nate_meurer 5y ago
In the US, unions fight hard to take that choice away from people. "Right to work" laws in many states allow people to opt out of union membership and fees. Unions hate these laws and fight relentlessly to get them overturned.
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  "Right to work" laws force unions to represent workers who are not union members. The truth is that no one is forcing you to work a union job.
  - erik_seaberg 5y ago
    A union is free to negotiate a contract that only applies to their own members, they just prefer not to so they can prevent non-members from competing using more favorable terms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members-only_unionism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members-only_unionism
  - nate_meurer 5y ago
    > The truth is that no one is forcing you to work a union job. That's pretty disingenuous. Try working for government at any level without also working for a union. I could turn your argument around and say, "if you want a union job just go find one!" Regardless, that choice you speak of represents a profound injustice according to union leaders. The ultimate goal of mainstream political labor movements is universal unionization. They would very much like to make it so that everyone is forced to pay union dues, no matter where they work.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

heavyset_go 5y ago

> Collective bargaining takes away my right to bargain for certain agreements for myself. No, they don't. Actors are able to negotiate themselves and with the help from their union, and they're all members of SAG-AFTRA.

stale2002 5y ago
> and they're all members So, in other words, their rights to bargain and engage in mutual agreements is restricted. You literally just explained how their rights are limited. Specifically, it is limited in that you have to be a part of this group, to engage in certain agreements. And even within that group, people are prevented from engaging in certain mutual agreements.
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  > So, in other words, their rights to bargain and engage in mutual agreements is restricted. You can negotiate without union representation. You're also free to be a non-union actor.
  - stale2002 5y ago
    > You can negotiate without union representation There are limits on the contracts that I could engage with, with another mutually interested party, is the point. If there were no limits, then, almost by definition, it would not be a union. So yes, a union puts limits on the contracts that mutually interested parties can engage in. Were you not aware that unions put limits on the contracts that mutually interested parties can engage in? Did you think that a company, and an interested worker, could just completely ignore union rules, and create their own contract, that conflicts with the rules of the union?