The Gross National Debt

Friday, March 11, 2011

Unions yes!

No. I have not blown a mental gasket or fuse as some of you are no doubt thinking. Nor have I suddenly switched sides.

At least from the way I see it, my Unions yes! stance is entirely in keeping with the stuff I have written before.

Since you are no doubt thinking "OK, Baker, prove it." I shall.

A union is simply a collection of people who band together to achieve a commonly held goal.

A worker's union is nothing more than a group of people with a common tie who come together to achieve a common goal. That their commonality is their work and the goal is also tied directly to their work is a minor ancillary.
Yes, it is minor compared to their right to join forces. At the same time, people should not be forced to join a union in order to get a job. That should be patently illegal.

You have yet hear me say people do not have the right to band together to work toward a common goal. You have never read, in my words, that unions do not have the right to exist.

What you have read is that I oppose unions which have moved away from working toward safer workplaces and now focus their attention on protecting incompetent employees and driving up the costs of their labor while allowing the quality to remain stagnant or decrease.

(Going off topic briefly, there is a reason American-made cars no longer dominate the American-made automobile market.)

It's even possible that I've said I don't like the idea of unions pretty much all the way around, 'cause I don't. So there, I said it so you don't have to try to remember.

Union Strategy.
Current unions, to my thinking, wind up shifting personal accountability onto a group. This eliminates the needs to people to be responsible. If the blame can be spread around, then no one is at fault. Taking corrective action in such a case gets exponentially harder as the size of the group increases.

It also reduces and eventually eliminates a drive to improve. Why? Because in a union that spreads the blame, either the credit will also be spread and so be diluted, or some at the top of the hierarchical heap will take all the credit.

The quaint notion that "It doesn't matter who gets the credit as long as the job gets done" is ok short time. It won't work long term. People need positive reinforcement. They need credit for doing good things.

No one is so altruistic that they honestly never care who gets the credit as long as the job gets done. Even the most devoutly faithful person who sacrifices continually in pursuit of their faith is hoping for an eventual reward.

I am a strong individualist, in case you haven't noticed.

That means I am willing to let you suffer the consequences of your actions as I do with mine.

This also means if you choose to join a union and subsume yourself into a gestalt, then I will support your right to do so. Doesn't mean I have to like it, agree with it or even help you to do it.

If you work against my interests, I'm going to fight you and your union.
The Second Amendment is the final guarantee that the rest of the Constitution will be the law of the land. How it is applied depends on what you do. And yes, that is a BMG .50 I'm holding.

I got your back. Will you get mine?
But it's still your right to unionize. That's a right I'm willing to defend.

If I block your attempts to form a union, then I am denying you the basic rights I hold dear. So, Unions yes!, even though I may agree with your reasons for forming the union.

The question now becomes, if I'm willing to stand up for your rights, are you willing to do the same for mine?

Since I'm thinking it, I'm gonna put it down here. If you chose to be an idiot, that's your right. I'm gonna call you an idiot. I will remark on the stupidity of your decision to give up your right to think for yourself. I will point out how you are being a moron.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Hi. I welcome lively debate. Attack the argument. Go after a person in the thread, your comments will not be posted.