nostr:npub1kpwlxpzkxfmuxjmzc2wp3rf9vjg0sgydmlhsnrgqr3maf59h86qqdxxzz4 It's not just about markets.

https://data.unicef.org/resources/child-labour-2020-global-estimates-trends-and-the-road-forward/

nostr:npub1kpwlxpzkxfmuxjmzc2wp3rf9vjg0sgydmlhsnrgqr3maf59h86qqdxxzz4 Unions is to give the workers a fair treatment, isn't it? To stop companies from acting like assholes to their workers.

Price-fixing labour sounds not as bad as price-fixing the market. After all, what is minimum wage if not price-fixing too? Or did you want to get rid of that as well?

nostr:npub1kpwlxpzkxfmuxjmzc2wp3rf9vjg0sgydmlhsnrgqr3maf59h86qqdxxzz4 Fun bit of trivia, some left wing anarchists are anti-union.

I'll have to investigate what the reasoning is. I looked up worker cooperative, but YT didn't offer any clarity.

nostr:npub1kpwlxpzkxfmuxjmzc2wp3rf9vjg0sgydmlhsnrgqr3maf59h86qqdxxzz4 Only makes (human... ) sense during a surplus of open position. Otherwise you have a race to the bottom - bad enough for some companies (e.g. think of critical infrastructure - water supply etc), but a bankrupt company does not necessarily imply major human suffering. But as a worker at one point you might not earn enough to sustain you/family/kids etc. Og course, you could think of "outsourcing" that to the state but then every citizen subsidies that specific industry sector. Better to let the sector pay, ergo minimum wages

nostr:npub1kpwlxpzkxfmuxjmzc2wp3rf9vjg0sgydmlhsnrgqr3maf59h86qqdxxzz4

There has always been the danger of unions creating their own massive power structures beyond organized crime. Unions are still needed due to failure by United States Federal Authorities to reign in big business. If we get rid of unions, collective bargaining creases to exist and big business grows even more stronger. U.S. elected politicians have already weakened anti-trust laws, so if we weaken or totally eliminate unions big business will continue lobbying efforts to do away with anti-trust laws and labor unions. There is no easy answer to this problem, U.S. history proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that big business cannot be trusted. U.S. history also proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that organized crime has in the past infiltrated labor unions.

So there has always been dishonestly within U.S. private business on both sides of the equation.

#economics #unions #QOTO #news

Sincerely, Katherine Tate, Managing Editor, #FreePeoplesFreePress News

nostr:npub1kpwlxpzkxfmuxjmzc2wp3rf9vjg0sgydmlhsnrgqr3maf59h86qqdxxzz4 In the UK, Unions have much wider role than that. They may do elsewhere, I don't know. There is a long history with matters such as safety, welfare and discrimination that they played a big role in, most of it now accepted by most people as reasonable and normal. I think such things need to be treated as a different from your point.

nostr:npub1kpwlxpzkxfmuxjmzc2wp3rf9vjg0sgydmlhsnrgqr3maf59h86qqdxxzz4 I believe union work should be limited to safe work condition and a livable wage.

Corporations could be involved in wage-fixing the labor market in their favor as well.

nostr:npub1kpwlxpzkxfmuxjmzc2wp3rf9vjg0sgydmlhsnrgqr3maf59h86qqdxxzz4 , yes, but unions have free market competition. (With the exception of public unions, different animal). A company can chose to not negotiate or hire a union, or can chose to have the union be the labor supplier. The company choses to sign contracts, or not. This is no difference than anyone who supplies iron ore, or oranges to a super market, or day care providers. The union supplies a service, labor. If the company doesn't like that supplier, they can hire others. This isn't often a good choice for the employer, (see Boeing and their issues moving production to North Carolina), but it is their choice to make.

Unions are a sign of a true free market economy, and I anticipate most of the objections brought up in this conversation, will be when the state screws the free market up. "right to work" laws, for example. Taft Hartley. Joe Biden screwing railway workers last year.

nostr:npub1kpwlxpzkxfmuxjmzc2wp3rf9vjg0sgydmlhsnrgqr3maf59h86qqdxxzz4 Unions are a special case because of the power differential.

Owning a company comes with certain protections, limited liability, which are not available to the common worker.

So if workers loose their jobs, they are a lot more vulnerable compared to owners. So they need to band together to protect themselves.

Any disruption of those vulnerable (to homelessness, starvation) banding together would be a form of oppression, since they have no other recourse than holding together. Owners, on the other hand, have an arsenal of possible ways to stay homed and fed after bankruptcy.

So, you can be against unions, but i would predict conditions getting very bad for workers due to many individual decisions to accept bad conditions over joblessness. And i would have to say it would be ethically valid if they would use force to stop unlivable conditions resulting from this.

nostr:npub1kpwlxpzkxfmuxjmzc2wp3rf9vjg0sgydmlhsnrgqr3maf59h86qqdxxzz4 Ah, a second way to view it:

You argue that workers should not be able to control the price point of their work.

Well, if they cannot control this very thing they can sell, why would anyone get to own a lot more than that (a whole company), including the right to control how much is payed to workers?

If the answer is "because it is like that", we are in "right of the strongest" territory, and any union effort, even if it turns the whole society upside down, would have the same ethical validity.