Skip to main content

View Diary: Big Business Goes After Unions to Defeat Democrats (327 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  insane (0+ / 0-)

    Who exactly would this benefit, other than the unions selected by the government to represent the workers?

    A government-granted monopoly on labor would destroy our freedom of free association. It would also be impossible to judge how effective it is, as there would be no competition, nothing to compare it to.

    If companies go under because they can't afford to pay workers, who is going to employ all of those workers? Or do you have a government program to fix that too?

    •  Strawman arguments (0+ / 0-)

      Who exactly would this benefit, other than the unions selected by the government to represent the workers?

      I never said that the government would "select" unions to represent the workers. If you read what I wrote more carefully, you'll note that I said that the workers would still have to organize the union.

      You can't have a union unless the workers organize it, whether a law recognizes every workplace as "unionized" or not. A union isn't something outside the workplace that enters into the workplace. A union is just what the word "union" suggests: an organization of the workers themselves.

      To answer your question, my proposal would benefit every working person in the country.

      A government-granted monopoly on labor would destroy our freedom of free association.

      What "government-granted monopoly on labor?" Passing a law recognizing all workplaces as "unionized" wouldn't create any monopoly.

      Each and every worksite would have it's own labor organization, if the workers organize it.

      Locals in the same industires could work together cooperatively, or even convene delegates to create federations (Like they did to create AFL-CIO, for example). But that wouldn't create a "government-granted monopoly."

      Speaking of "government-granted monoplies," though: they aren't as unusual as you might think. We have quite a few of them. They are called corporations.

      It would also be impossible to judge how effective it is, as there would be no competition, nothing to compare it to.

      A misconception. Do you imagine that each and every union has the exact same contract as every other union?

      If the workforce had representation on the board and in the executive governing structure, as well as collective bargaining, then "competitiveness" would be a team effort, and would be an upfront part of collective bargaining. As it should be for organizations with government-granted charters.

      If companies go under because they can't afford to pay workers, who is going to employ all of those workers?

      Do you think that all workers would make the same amount of money, regardless of skill, merit, education or experience simply because they have a union? That isn't the way the real world operates, with a union or without one. If a company goes under because they can't afford to pay their workers, then they probably need new leadership.

      Do you imagine that corporations would simply disappear if self-proclaimed aristocrats stamped their feet and decided to close everything? No, indeed. And they wouldn't get away with trying to walk away with the wealth they accumulated under a government-granted charter, either.

      To answer your question, I DO have a government program to fix calamitous miscalculations from corporate leadership.

      Charter revocation. Trustee receivership. Disenfranchisement of majority shareholders. New board elections. And finally, new management, preferably managers who have ONE TITLE per person. ANY state governor could do what I just described, preferably with the cooperation of a progressive attorney general.

      Just one final question.

      our freedom of free association

      Unionizing the whole country would destroy what freedom? I proposed reversing the situation as it exists today. The obstacles I would propose we use to discourage getting OUT of the union are the same obstacles currently in place which prevent union organization. You want to explain that "freedom of association" a little more?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site