View Single Post
Old 03-23-2009, 09:22 PM   #21 (permalink)
pan6467
Lennonite Priest
 
pan6467's Avatar
 
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by FoolThemAll View Post
Admittedly, this is one of the issues on which I am most extreme, but...

I don't understand why this shouldn't be legal. Why shouldn't a business owner be able to decide that he doesn't want a union involved with his business? Why shouldn't he be able to prefer those employees ambivalent or hostile to union representation?
Because it is illegal to fire people who talk about unionizing. The reason being employers would fire workers for talking about unions. I don't see why that law needs to change or not be enforced.

Very simply put, if an employer is respecting their workers and treating them well, the workers probably wouldn't need a union and thus talk would dissipate fast.

If the company treats workers like shit, upper management is raping the company, then the workers should have the right to protect themselves from that.

Workers have just as much if not more interest in how a larger company performs than most owners and board directors have. The workers should have the right to have some say in how the company is run, since it is their livelihood at stake.

Don't want a union, treat the workers better.

Quote:
It'll probably come down to fundamental value disagreements on how to prioritize property rights and employment rights - the latter of which I don't hold existent - so this might be a pointless discussion right from the start... but as common and accepted as it is, it's just completely foreign to me that we should bar a business owner from this level of self-autonomy.
It is a fundamental issue and a value/moral issue. I owned my own business once and managed a few, I know that I never would have succeeded in my job or my company if I did not show my workers that they were as valuable if not moreso in some cases as the customers. Yes, I could have found cheaper labor and been a prick to make bonuses or more profit in my company, but why? It almost always was a headache trying to find good workers and having to train and build trust between them and me. It was far easier to do what I could to keep them happy and wanting to stay.

If I made bonus or profit increased, I made sure the staff was rewarded as well. Thus, they had a stake in how well the company did. They had car payments, rent, bills to pay just as I did. If I did my best to make sure they were able to pay those bills and have a little disposable income, their attitudes were better, they worked harder and my customers saw happier staff that were willing to help them. This brought about a very loyal customer base, which would increase profits and allow more growth.

Most companies don't work that way, they'll work their employees to death, show minimal at best, care for their staffs and the quality shows that. And when a worker is in need of more to pay bills or whatever, the company fires them and hires cheaper labor. No loyalty to the worker = no loyalty from the worker = poor customer service and poor quality of goods.

So to say owners should have sole rights as to whether a union is needed or how a business should be run, is IMHO very wrong. If ownership does the right thing, the union laws won't matter, if they don't do the right things then the laws should protect the workers who have just as much if not more at stake.
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"
pan6467 is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54