Re: Retribution not enough
On Monday, October 22, 2001, at 06:03 AM, Sampo Syreeni wrote:
Sure, unions are good and using coercion to stop them from coming into being is bad. But that only applies as long as unions are granted no legal status apart from other voluntary organizations, and participating in a strike is taken as what it is, a refusal to work. Likely a breach of an enforceable contract, too. Any "workers' rights" beyond that are something you'll have a *really hard time* justifying. Asymmetry does not help, either.
"Sure, unions are good" is not at all obvious to me. Why do you claim this? Most labor unions are simply rent-seeking clubs designed to cement the status quo. Teacher's unions in the U.S. are a prime example: once the union got powerful enough, it fought for a tenure-type system which made it nearly impossible to remove those who taught poorly and to reward those who taught especially well. I've never belonged to a labor union of any kind, and they are essentially absent from the chip and computer industries. From what I have seen, labor unions are a collectivist evil. --Tim May "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant." --John Stuart Mill
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 08:44:09AM -0700, Tim May wrote:
"Sure, unions are good" is not at all obvious to me. Why do you claim this?
Most labor unions are simply rent-seeking clubs designed to cement the status quo. Teacher's unions in the U.S. are a prime example: once the union got powerful enough, it fought for a tenure-type system which made it nearly impossible to remove those who taught poorly and to reward those who taught especially well.
I've never belonged to a labor union of any kind, and they are essentially absent from the chip and computer industries.
From what I have seen, labor unions are a collectivist evil.
Same here. The union management quickly becomes yet another set of bosses. You'd have to be an idiot to voluntarily request that you have TWO sets of bosses instead of one. Bert Hopwoods "Whatever Happened to the British Motorcycle Industry" documents a great example of the idiocy of unions. The British ruled the motorcycle industry in the 50s and 60s, but all British bike makers went bust by 1977. While he attributes most of the blame to management (which he was part of), the unions come in for their share, mostly for the stupid strikes that killed off Triumph/BSA in the mid 70s... "hey, sales are down and there's a world-wide recession, so let's go on strike to preserve our jobs!". Idiots. Eric
On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Tim May wrote:
"Sure, unions are good" is not at all obvious to me. Why do you claim this?
When they're not given special privileges, they are a useful tool for market awareness and employee side organization. Corporations can be seen as the employer side one -- if there's no need to organize, why should corporations exceed a single employee in size?
Most labor unions are simply rent-seeking clubs designed to cement the status quo.
In a free market, they would be an employee side monopoly at best. We all know how stable monopolies are.
Teacher's unions in the U.S. are a prime example: once the union got powerful enough, it fought for a tenure-type system which made it nearly impossible to remove those who taught poorly and to reward those who taught especially well.
The precise same argument can be used in an argument for monopoly control. Or the coerced breakup of any sufficient large corporation. You for that?
I've never belonged to a labor union of any kind, and they are essentially absent from the chip and computer industries.
Me neither. Not going to, either. That does not mean that unions couldn't be good for other people.
From what I have seen, labor unions are a collectivist evil.
Well, in a state where they're not hiding behind the government, that's something you'll just have to get used to. They've earned killing? Unions can play that game too, I hear. Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - mailto:decoy@iki.fi, tel:+358-50-5756111 student/math+cs/helsinki university, http://www.iki.fi/~decoy/front openpgp: 050985C2/025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2
On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, Eric Murray wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 08:44:09AM -0700, Tim May wrote:
"Sure, unions are good" is not at all obvious to me. Why do you claim this?
Most labor unions are simply rent-seeking clubs designed to cement the status quo. Teacher's unions in the U.S. are a prime example: once the union got powerful enough, it fought for a tenure-type system which made it nearly impossible to remove those who taught poorly and to reward those who taught especially well.
I've never belonged to a labor union of any kind, and they are essentially absent from the chip and computer industries.
From what I have seen, labor unions are a collectivist evil.
Same here.
The union management quickly becomes yet another set of bosses. You'd have to be an idiot to voluntarily request that you have TWO sets of bosses instead of one.
True, Unions are idiotic. Being the spawn of the southwest wv coal fields, I can promise that the boss who tries to get you some pay is somewhat better than the boss who just as soon have you machine gunned if you don't want to work for free.
participants (4)
-
cubic-dog -
Eric Murray -
Sampo Syreeni -
Tim May