this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2025
79 points (98.8% liked)
United States | News & Politics
3274 readers
953 users here now
Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.
If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.
Rules
Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.
No memes.
Post news related to the United States.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I've never understood laws and shit that limit union rights. Like, if a union decides to strike because they want better pay or disagree with the company's values, what are they going to do, arrest the workers and keep them from working?
Yes. Or fine then. Or murder them. The history of unionization is horrendous for those fighting for basic rights.
I don't want to downplay the consequences of a strike, but that's the whole power of unions. How to you fine somebody for not working? Take it out of the paycheck that they're not earning? In the modern era, in the US, people aren't getting murdered for striking. Is it a possibility? Sure, but even with everything going on, not realistic. Then we're back to arresting people which doesn't help the company in any way.
I understand that this is all an over simplification of the situation, but at a high level, this is the whole point of workers unions.
Arresting people for striking does have an immense chilling effect on people thinking about going on strike. Which does help the company. They get to take the unsalvageable employees and turn them into examples for the fence-sitting employees.
I agree. I'm all for unions. Just saying there is a history of horrendous actions.
That is precisely what they’ll do. The evidence is that they’ve done exactly those things in the past.
Yes.