But then the union and those who support unions have no responsibility to them, including pretending like what they are doing isn’t selfish and wrong.
You have a moral responsibility to help your fellow workers, and not aid the rich assholes in exploiting them. This idea that you opt into morality is silly.
WE LIVE IN A SOCIETY
I’m sure it’ll annoy those on strike and they are free to say so, as long as they don’t try and hinder the non-union worker that’s fine.
Blackleg is one I learned from Billy Bragg.
There seems to be an underlying assumption that every union action is a moral good and a just cause. I don’t hold that same assumption.
Not at all. I won’t call someone a scab if they’re, for example, undermining an action by a brutalist police union. The term is correctly used as a slur for people whose actions the speaker finds deplorable in a specific way.
The union doesn’t owe them anything either, particularly anything like a union card if they send in an application.
The reality is that all good actors want to be part of the union, because it is the union that makes acting a viable career for the rank and file actor.
I wouldn’t draw such a narrow line. There are and have been plenty of industrial actions undertaken that were necessary, and many that are counterproductive. No-one is under any moral obligation to stand on the side of the strikers by default. Each case has to stand on its own merits and I’ll support or not based on that.
However, even if I do support the strikers I still support the equal and opposite right of the employer and non-union worker to make other arrangements.
No, it doesn’t owe them anything and nor should they actively stand in their way. Being a member of a union should be completely voluntary. No coercion either way and definitely nothing approaching an official or de-facto “closed shop”
Which inherently means you don’t support the strikers or their cause because you are supporting someone who is actively working against them.
It’s that simple. This is a scab situation. They are working against the union by taking their jobs. They aren’t taking a non-union job that was there before.
The concept of unions does not work if scabbing is not treated as wrong (assuming one supports the cause).
If you scab, then why should I ever help you out ever again?
I’m not supporting them to the extent that you might think is reasonable but that’s not my problem.
I’m in favour of the concept of joining a union, withdrawal of labour and also the concept of employers and non-union workers being free to negotiate terms when others are out on strike.
The rights and wrongs of the individual action are always going to vary and are of secondary importance to those concepts and rights that I stated above.
It is already. Any people who want a viable career in acting can voluntarily join the union. Other people, who want to get an acting job where the pay almost covers their commuting costs, are free to do that without a union.
Nothing is stopping them besides needing to eat and pay rent.
Moderating:
Several Flags have come in about the hijack.
Just a reminder, so far so good. Attack or challenge the content of the post and not the poster please.
As long as there is freedom on all sides to negotiate either individually or collectively then that’s absolutely fine.
If this is considered a hijack I’m happy to let it die. I know it can get heated for some people and the nod towards beating employers to death was a bit near the knuckle.
I think folks–including myself–are unclear what you mean by “actively stand in their way.” Could you provide some examples of what the union shouldn’t do? Because if you mean “nor should the union slash their tires and set their puppies on fire,” I agree. If you mean, “nor should the union blackball them from productions that union members will be involved in,” I disagree. If you mean something in the middle, I’m not sure.
No, you’re not supporting them. The context at that point was not whether or not you support the general concept of a union, but was discussing when you support a particular cause by a particular union. You said that, even when you support them, you also support the scab who tries to steal their job and undermine their cause.
That is not some lower level of support. That is not support at all. You cannot support a cause, and also support the actions that work against that cause.
It’s like saying you support reducing carbon emissions while then actively increasing your own carbon emissions. The two concepts are at odds.
Again, a scab is someone who steals the job of a striker. Strikers do not give up their jobs to strike. That’s the power of Unions–that you can strike while still holding your job. Allowing scabs allows for undermining the very concept of unions.
You call it a “moral issue”, I don’t. Party a says I don’t think this is a high enough wage for this job, and I won’t do it unless you pay me more. Party b says the pay seems acceptable to me, I’ll take the job. There is no reason that party b shouldn’t be allowed to take the job and no obligation to party a to not take it.
Both the former and the latter would be examples of “actively stand in their way” and unacceptable to me.
A non-union workers contract is with the employer and the union should have no ability to exclude them.
Why on earth shouldn’t they be free to negotiate the contract they want to negotiate? Why are you limiting the union members’ freedom of association like this?
Are there other behaviors that I might consider odious in a co-worker that nonetheless you’d preclude me from including in a negotiation? Let’s say I want a contract in which the employer will only hire people who bathe regularly, so I’m not subjected to foul odors; or in which the employer will only hire people who preclude from shouting Nazi slogans at work; or in which the employer will only hire people for my construction crew who test negative for meth. Would you preclude all those from contract negotiations?
It sure sounds like you’re opposed to freedom of contract negotiations.
For my part in triggering this subthread, when I said
“But often the “choice” is “you join this union and do what the union tells you to do or you will never work in this industry”.”
I very much was talking about the general concept of a union. I, myself, have never and would never want to be involved in one.