| Are we talking about the 'right' to refuse to work without reprocussions to employers? ... That's just nuts! ...(even on my planet, Chancellor). Workers (in most democracies/republics) have the right to find alternate employment, or even to start their own businesses and hire their own labor. Businesses (should) have the right to terminate employees for causes like refusing to work. They should also have the right to find people willing to work for less than organized labor unions are demanding. Even more so if the jobs are in the public sector (where they are presumably more important than 'menial' labor).
We have the right to pursue an avenue of employment on an equal playing field ... we don't have the right to place a stranglehold on a business or industry by preventing them from hiring willing employees in order to further our own greedy and lazy whims. Don't like how your employer treats you? ... Start your own competing company and put your former employer out of business .... that's how many of the most successful companies in America started.
It doesn't help consumers, businesses, or ultimately the work force as a whole to basically quit your job hoping they will cave to demands.
Besides, how many people do you really think are being paid what THEY think they are worth (not what the market dictates they are worth ... as should be in a FREE market) ....
Allowing workers to strike without consequence is a socialist value that only hinders the consumers ability to make choices about how to interact in the economy. Completely adversary to capitalism and free market economic theory. |