English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

if businesses can organize against labor, can't labor organize against business?

doesn't freedom and capitalism work both ways?

or should workers just shut up and do what they're told?

find a new job that can do whatever it wants to labor?

god bless america?!

2007-09-26 02:12:54 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

i realize that there are UNIONS. i think i need to stop this policy of "having faith that people have brains." it clearly is not working.

my question is, why do some cons think that getting rid of unions is a good idea?

and to all the people that said "DER AND YEAH THEY HAVE THE RIGHT NOT TO PAY YOU. THEY CAN JUST FIRE YOU LOL." i mentioned that in my original post. so the workers will go somewhere else. where they can be exploited some more. sounds like a great system. where do i sign up?!

2007-09-26 02:22:55 · update #1

14 answers

You have caught on to what I think of as the balance system.
When things go too far on either side, labor or management, we either get interest in unions or we get snowed under by management. There was a time when even children worked six days a week twelve hours a day in dangerous even deadly conditions. The company owned you, and getting out was a daydream if you had the energy to dream, the excuse given was that those who risked their money for profits were entitled to those profits, and yes, if the workers didn't like it there were others who would take their jobs.
When unions first formed they were shot at, burned in the buildings they took over, beaten and still they fought for the things we take for granted today, like a forty hour work week, vacations, and lunch and bathroom breaks. Sick pay, workmans comp too.
The US flourished under the new middle class that came up, we could buy cars, because Ford, said that he was going to pay his workers enough so they could afford to buy his cars, their products. Auto Workers bought homes, cars, took vacations in Disneyland. Bought refridgerators and furniture too, giving more jobs to more Americans.
But the unions soon got too much power, they got their birthdays off, and too many vacation days. Management wanted more power, and since they have the money, they chipped away at unions and took the jobs to nonunion states.
At first they kept the benefits, but later they took them away.
Unions lost members, and political power, and then a really strange thing happened, a new system called trickle down was waved in front of people, it said, you make the rich richer, and you get to dine on what falls off their table and the richer they are, the more crumbs you get...trust us.
Thats where we are now. We are supposed to be happy with crumbs from the Big House, grateful for the bones, prayerful that they don't take those crumbs to India, or Malaysia where kids work six days a week, twelve hours a day, until they begin to form unions, weak at first, dangerous, but eventually they want more, and then the businesses find some other poorer nation to exploit.
I remember when Japan was the place for cheap shoddy labor. Thats changed.
It's balance, we need a good balance between the needs of management and the needs of labor and right now we just don't have that. We do need a healthy, growing, viable middle class, and, lets be honest, trickle down doesn't cover that.
God bless America, she needs it.

2007-09-26 02:39:28 · answer #1 · answered by justa 7 · 0 0

Well, they can and do DEMAND what they want, when they want. However, the employer still has the ultimate right to say NO!
Labor can organize against business, however and unfortunately, the business will still find someone who will work for the wages they want to pay with the hours they want to work. Or, they will outsource the jobs to other countries where they can get 3 people for the price of one in America.
So, it's really a lose lose situation for the work force.

2007-09-26 09:19:43 · answer #2 · answered by Colonel 6 · 1 0

You have the right to find a different job if you do not like the pay and benefits that your employer gives you. Most people agree to a wage when they accept a job offer. They should know the benefits they will receive and what is expected of them on the job. If people refuse to work for the wages and benefits the company can decide to increase said wages and or benefits. You are not there to tell them how to run their business. If you were that smart you wouldn't be working for them to start with, you would have your own business. Then tell me how you would feel if your emplyees tried to dictate the way you would run your business?

2007-09-26 09:21:34 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I think labor already has organized against business', it's called a union. Pay usually reflects the demand for the job. If you want to get paid more go into a more demanding field like medicine or computer tech.

2007-09-26 09:18:22 · answer #4 · answered by tman 5 · 1 2

You can demand any salary or benefit that you want, but they are likely not to pay it because there is someone else willing to do the job for less. There are some positions that require skills that are in limited supply so that person can and does demand just about whatever they want.

2007-09-26 09:17:35 · answer #5 · answered by remowlms 7 · 2 0

the wages are guided by supply and demand. If there are a lot of workers that can do your job most likely you will be paid little. If there are few workers who are able to do your job then you will be paid what you demand.

It all lies in your hands not someone elses. How much should you earn for unskilled labor that anyone could do?

2007-09-26 09:16:45 · answer #6 · answered by scott A 5 · 1 1

You could demand any amount of money.
The real question is this:
Would they pay what you demanded ?
Are you worth what you believe you are in that job?

There is a way to organize against a company, it's called a UNION

2007-09-26 09:18:06 · answer #7 · answered by graciouswolfe 5 · 2 0

Sure, that is how free markets work..
Now if the business choses to move overseas for cheaper labor...who loses?
Globalization is what the US bets on...and as such it has its pros and cons

2007-09-26 09:18:26 · answer #8 · answered by Isabelle06 4 · 2 1

Ahem, the year is 2007, not 1907. We already do that.

2007-09-26 09:17:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

a worker has a right to leave the job if they cannot get what they want

2007-09-26 09:18:44 · answer #10 · answered by gerafalop 7 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers