• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bracing for Right To Work, MN Teacher's Union creates a new trap

Nickyjo said:
Sorry, but 1- you are missing the point about free enterprise. The union bargains with the employer to create a contract that requires union membership. That is the free market.
Click to expand...

No it isn't, not in the slightest. Coercion isn't free market. Unions exist at all because they have coercive privileges.

The government has to step in affirmatively to pass right to work laws, that is, it has to interfere with the free market.
Click to expand...

Unions are antithetical to anything "free market." There is nothing "free market" about unions. Nothing. They exist only through coercion.

2- Your notion that the government could resolve these issues as well as a union is hopelessly naive.
Click to expand...

No, they can and do resolve them better than any union ever could, because laws apply to everyone. And it's not naive. What are you talking about? Government has taxing and spending and lawmaking and enforcement power.

3 - on the short handled hoe issue, I repeat that the court said it was wrong, but that was it... the legislature would not have acted to situation without the work of the union. Sure, at some time the legislature *might* have acted, but absent the farmworkers Union, it would have been the powerful California growers vs. unorganized workers, many who came to California from Texas for several months and who had no votes to offer the pols.
Click to expand...

Ultimately it was government that addressed this. I'm not going to play speculation games with you as to what might have happened had it happened differently. Government addressed abuse, as it routinely does and always will.

The bargain that was made years ago by our government, the one you appear to dislike, was: you, the employer have to negotiate in good faith.
Click to expand...

Real negotiations involve the right of either side to walk away and then there is no deal whatsoever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom