Total Posts:7|Showing Posts:1-7
Jump to topic:

Libertarian Case Against Right to Work

lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2012 9:17:19 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I hadn't thought about it before, but right to work simply bans the voluntary association of labor unions and employers. I had in my head that labor unions shouldn't be able to force employees to join, but if that's what's stipulated in contract the labor union and the employer agree on, where's the foul?
There were some prominent libertarians and classical liberals against right to work laws.
The Full article is a good read.
http://reason.com...
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2012 11:08:40 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Do you think contracts should effect third parties? For example, If you buy a product, should there be an agreement between you and the producer that you can't buy some other product? This to me is unfair business practice.

Furthermore, it should be recognized that the laws favor labor unions significantly. Its illegal to terminate an employee for trying to start a union, which you should recognize as a breach of employer rights. "Right to work" laws mitigate that effect.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2012 11:28:22 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/16/2012 11:08:40 AM, darkkermit wrote:
Do you think contracts should effect third parties? For example, If you buy a product, should there be an agreement between you and the producer that you can't buy some other product? This to me is unfair business practice.

Its voluntary association through and through, I fail to see your comparison with some non existent producer purchaser non competition clause.

Furthermore, it should be recognized that the laws favor labor unions significantly. Its illegal to terminate an employee for trying to start a union, which you should recognize as a breach of employer rights. "Right to work" laws mitigate that effect.

Did you read the article? It says we should repeal old laws, not layer more laws on top.

You pro or con right to work legislation?
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2012 11:49:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/16/2012 11:28:22 AM, lewis20 wrote:
At 12/16/2012 11:08:40 AM, darkkermit wrote:
Do you think contracts should effect third parties? For example, If you buy a product, should there be an agreement between you and the producer that you can't buy some other product? This to me is unfair business practice.

Its voluntary association through and through, I fail to see your comparison with some non existent producer purchaser non competition clause.

So you believe producers should have the right to exclusive dealing contracts?

Furthermore, it should be recognized that the laws favor labor unions significantly. Its illegal to terminate an employee for trying to start a union, which you should recognize as a breach of employer rights. "Right to work" laws mitigate that effect.

Did you read the article? It says we should repeal old laws, not layer more laws on top.

I didn't read the article. However, for political purposes, many legislation laws that benefit the union aren't going away anytime soon, so the better alternative is to use legislation that is more politically viable to combat the other legislation.

You pro or con right to work legislation?

Pro. I don't believe all contracts between two parties should be enforceable. A good example, would be Trust-contracts between businesses which I would oppose.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2012 11:49:41 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/16/2012 9:17:19 AM, lewis20 wrote:
I hadn't thought about it before, but right to work simply bans the voluntary association of labor unions and employers. I had in my head that labor unions shouldn't be able to force employees to join, but if that's what's stipulated in contract the labor union and the employer agree on, where's the foul?
There were some prominent libertarians and classical liberals against right to work laws.
The Full article is a good read.
http://reason.com...

My issue is twofold:
1. If it is not a closed-shop, the new hire loses his ability to contract with the employer (as the union contract is used), and the union (as this employee was not there to approve it).
2. Unless the employee joins the union, he has no ability to contract, as the union contract affects this employee and he is not allowed to vote on said contract. Consequently, the only way the employee can contract is to be forced into a third-party association. Tell me, if you wanted to dissolve the union, do you have to join the union in order to make the motion?

If the owner's contract says it is a closed-shop, then that is fine, as it is his perogative to run and hire who he deems worthy, and apparently that means only union members (plus it could be a huge bargaining chip in his favor).
My work here is, finally, done.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2012 12:38:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Right to work is libertarian.
At 12/16/2012 9:17:19 AM, lewis20 wrote:
I hadn't thought about it before, but right to work simply bans the voluntary association of labor unions and employers.
No it doesn't. It allows workers to choose for themselves, whether they want to join or not.

I had in my head that labor unions shouldn't be able to force employees to join, but if that's what's stipulated in contract the labor union and the employer agree on, where's the foul?
Those contracts are invalid because he employer entered into the contract involuntarily. The employer was coerced into the contract with the labor union, in order to grant the labor union more power over the employer at the expense of the individual employees.
There were some prominent libertarians and classical liberals against right to work laws.
Please name some of these so called "libertarians". Don't say Ron Paul, because he is not a real libertarian; he just plays one on TV.
The Full article is a good read.
http://reason.com...
I hate it when people do that.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/16/2012 12:52:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 12/16/2012 12:38:20 PM, DanT wrote:
Right to work is libertarian.
At 12/16/2012 9:17:19 AM, lewis20 wrote:
I hadn't thought about it before, but right to work simply bans the voluntary association of labor unions and employers.
No it doesn't. It allows workers to choose for themselves, whether they want to join or not.
This is not the issue of right to work.

I had in my head that labor unions shouldn't be able to force employees to join, but if that's what's stipulated in contract the labor union and the employer agree on, where's the foul?
Those contracts are invalid because he employer entered into the contract involuntarily. The employer was coerced into the contract with the labor union, in order to grant the labor union more power over the employer at the expense of the individual employees.
There were some prominent libertarians and classical liberals against right to work laws.
Please name some of these so called "libertarians". Don't say Ron Paul, because he is not a real libertarian; he just plays one on TV.
The Full article is a good read.
http://reason.com...
I hate it when people do that.

Why is there a difference between a union bargaining for all employees, or if the employees collectively make demands or quit (threaten a walk-out unless raises/benefits occur)? Labor unions and employers enter the contract voluntarily; employees vote to unionize, employers hammer out the details or close shop and try again.

I would like to point out that, especially with this issue, you need to be careful of your language. It is illegal to be forced to join a union (this may not be true if it is a closed shop). However, the union contract MUST apply to all employees, says the Supreme Court. So, employees who are not in the union still must pay bargaining fees, which is fair; however, these are not the same as dues, in amount or context. Right to Work laws make it so the non-union employees don't have to pay these fees.

Personally, I would rather the contract not apply to those who don't want it, and have it apply to those who do (having them pay these fees or join and pay dues).
My work here is, finally, done.