posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 05:49 PM
Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Originally posted by whaaa
This is just union busting to keep free men from gathering together and bargaining in their own best interest.
That's called Fascism and tyranny.
Disagree. It's called "Free market labor policy" and it states, essentially, you either take the job for the pay offered, or you choose not to take
the job and work elsewhere.
Actually no, it's not that straight forward. Employer offered a job, the employer says he can only offer you competitive wages that is not enough for
you to live on, you refuse to accept it, other applicants collectively agree, and there is assentially nobody in town that the business can look to
who will accept their position, so, like a good capitalist business, the employer has no choice
but to increase the wage income offered, The
employer is not being forced
to increase it, and the candidate employees are not being forced
to accept the wages. The employer just has
no choice but to increase what is offered and accept they cannot cut corners anymore.
Now, ofcourse it's not that simple now a days. Businesses are able to find far more cheaper employement overseas or through hiring illegals, and they
get away with it everytime with tax cuts because we have a segment of the population continiously protecting their actions. Obviously with these
recessionary times, despite the record profits of many businesses, people are still being cut out of a decent living. Unions are not as influencial as
they once were, but as they stand, they are the only option of many individual employees or the unemployed desperate seeking a living.
is arguing here that businesses should be obligated to hire Union workers or abide by union rules, that is utter BS. What is at core
here in argument is the necessary function of unions, but people like you would be so naive to insist the employer is looking out for our best
interests all the time. That is nonsense.
edit on 26-2-2011 by Southern Guardian because: (no reason given)