> You're still focused on the unions being able to do whatever they want.
No, I'm focusing on what they typically do, and what laws are typically made to regulate and curtail their power, and what names the laws have typically been given. "Right-to-work", as a descriptor of legislation, explicitly refers to regulating a union's ability to enter into certain kinds of exclusive contracts. That's what it means... that's where the phrase comes from. Laws exist that prevent unions and employers from making union membership a condition of employment, because non-union members have "A right to work".
> If an employer wants a union-only shop, that should be fine
What if the employer doesn't want it... but the employees do? Why is the owner's opinion in any way RELEVANT?
If a union is an organized free association of the employees, where does an employer get the power to deny employees their free association outside of work?
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2014-07-02 02:07 pm (UTC)No, I'm focusing on what they typically do, and what laws are typically made to regulate and curtail their power, and what names the laws have typically been given. "Right-to-work", as a descriptor of legislation, explicitly refers to regulating a union's ability to enter into certain kinds of exclusive contracts. That's what it means... that's where the phrase comes from. Laws exist that prevent unions and employers from making union membership a condition of employment, because non-union members have "A right to work".
> If an employer wants a union-only shop, that should be fine
What if the employer doesn't want it... but the employees do? Why is the owner's opinion in any way RELEVANT?
If a union is an organized free association of the employees, where does an employer get the power to deny employees their free association outside of work?