Comments on: Unions http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/141 Ian Lance Taylor Tue, 6 Jan 2009 23:22:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.2 Comment on Unions by: Ian Lance Taylor http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/141#comment-10262 Tue, 12 Feb 2008 07:19:12 +0000 http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/141#comment-10262 I assume your first comment is saying that while unions may be OK, a closed shop is not. I didn't really address the reasons for the closed shop; they are attempts to address the free rider problem, which is a particular problem when union dues are used to pay for outside negotiators. The power disparity arises because when a non-executive employee and a company part ways, the company is affected only a very little bit, while the employee is affected a lot. I think multiple different unions is a fine idea. I assume your first comment is saying that while unions may be OK, a closed shop is not. I didn’t really address the reasons for the closed shop; they are attempts to address the free rider problem, which is a particular problem when union dues are used to pay for outside negotiators.

The power disparity arises because when a non-executive employee and a company part ways, the company is affected only a very little bit, while the employee is affected a lot.

I think multiple different unions is a fine idea.

]]> Comment on Unions by: fche http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/141#comment-10099 Fri, 08 Feb 2008 17:23:27 +0000 http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/141#comment-10099 Two more points. This "massive power disparity" is misconstrued here. As applied to any particular employee, the company has just as much power to discontinue that relationship as the employee does. Multiplying the power across all employees is not meaningful. (A company can't fire me 1000 times just because it has 1000 employees.) Regarding union/closed shops. What do you think about different unions competing in representing various subsets of the employees? I'm not talking about "certification" time competition, but having multiple active unions amongst the same workforce. Two more points.

This “massive power disparity” is misconstrued here. As applied to any particular employee, the company has just as much power to discontinue that relationship as the employee does. Multiplying the power across all employees is not meaningful. (A company can’t fire me 1000 times just because it has 1000 employees.)

Regarding union/closed shops. What do you think about different unions competing in representing various subsets of the employees? I’m not talking about “certification” time competition, but having multiple active unions amongst the same workforce.

]]> Comment on Unions by: fche http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/141#comment-10098 Fri, 08 Feb 2008 17:19:12 +0000 http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/141#comment-10098 > Banding together is only effective if nearly everybody does it. Hence the union and the closed shop. Really? You think a typical company could tolerate, say, 50% of its employees stopping work? > Banding together is only effective if nearly everybody does it. Hence the union and the closed shop.

Really? You think a typical company could tolerate, say, 50% of its employees stopping work?

]]>