View Single Post
  #164 (permalink)   Report Post  
Wm James
 
Posts: n/a
Default Starbucks Obstructing First Union Vote

On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 08:25:16 GMT, (M J Carley)
wrote:

>In the referenced article,
writes:
>
>>What a crock! I want government to protect all people's freedom to
>>trade. That includes the workers' right to trade their labor for
>>whatever they want, whether more or les than what you or a union or a
>>company think is enough. It also includes those joining unions right
>>to only trade their labor collectively. It also includes a company's
>>right NOT to trade with those who insist on trading their labor
>>collectively.

>
>So you believe that a company's workers do not have (or should not
>have) the right to decide who will represent them in a negotiation?


Of course not! If the buyer doesn't want to talk to some third party
he shouldn't have to. When you are buying something, do you think
some potential seller has some silly "right" to make you negotiate
with someone else? Why should there be any negotiation unless the
buyer agrees to it anyway? If I'm buying something and set a price,
those unwilling to accept that price can go somewhere else. If I can't
get what I want for that price, I might choose to do without or rasie
it. I have no interest in some bozo telling me his client accepts the
deal but demands something more.

If you want to join a union, fine! If you want to join any other
club, fine. Who cares? But if I'm your employer, why should that
have anything to do with me unless I choose to join it, deal with it,
or otherwise freely choose to associate in some manner with it?

William R. James