• An employer be able to fire striking labor workers

    Striking workers are a clear impediment to working and bad for business. The reality is that the employee does not own the job, the employer does. If a worker is unhappy with his current state of employment or the conditions therein, he should simply move on to another employer. Striking does nothing to further any good for any business.

  • An employer is always in his right to fire non working individuals

    In today's society, labor laws have become prevalent and always the employee has had the advantage in the regulations while employers lose more and more control over their workstaff. If they want they absolutely can fire non working people so they can be replaced by another worker who will happily do the job.

  • Employers should only fire when negotiations have completely broken down

    Employers should only be able to fire striking workers if there has been a good faith effort to negotiate an agreement and the negotiations have completely broken down. If it is too easy to fire workers, employers have less incentive to come to the bargaining table and actually try to work out a deal. If unions know that there are no circumstances where their membership can be fired, they have an incentive to prolong strikes indefinitely. The reality is that the economy benefits when companies are open for business and workers are earning reasonable wages..

  • No, an employer should not be able to fire striking labor workers.

    An employer should not be able to fire striking labor workers because that creates a cycle of employers being allowed to treat their employees unfairly, because if employees spoke out they would be replaced. Employers should listen to the concerns of employees who strike and try to solve the problem instead of firing labor workers who decide to strike.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.