union-liberties under state-corporatism - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

The non-democratic state: Platonism, Fascism, Theocracy, Monarchy etc.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#13754398
Should it be legal to go on strike?
Should the employers-side be allowed to use lockout?
Should there be restrictions on who a union can elect into a corporation?

Had Mussolini been here, he would have said no on the two first, yes on the last one. I don't have any strong opinions on the matter really, even though I am leaning towards the opposite end - yes, yes and no. - It is easier to be relaxed on such things now than in the 1920 & 30s perhaps.

The challenge of corporatism would then be to fix everything without such incidents, even though it would be legal. With my proposal (Technocratic Functionalism, see different thread) the corporations will a lot of the time be working on making the industries more eco-friendly, so a strike or two will not damage the credibility of the system that much as long as a green-turn actually takes place.

Opinions?
User avatar
By Dr House
#13754408
Tribbles wrote:Should it be legal to go on strike?
Should the employers-side be allowed to use lockout?

No, and no -- both are disruptive to the flow of business. Instead, the government is to offer arbitration for collective bargaining cases.

Tribbles wrote:Should there be restrictions on who a union can elect into a corporation?

I have a feeling this would be appropriate, but I'm not sure what restrictions would be appropriate and why, so for the time being I'm withholding an opinion on this one.
By Wolfman
#13754526
Instead, the government is to offer arbitration for collective bargaining cases.


This is the most preferred solution, but considering history (well, Capitalism), it seems like owners rarely want to talk. There would need to be some kind of punishment system possible for workers or unions that don't want to talk.
User avatar
By Dr House
#13754996
Wolfman wrote:There would need to be some kind of punishment system possible for workers or unions that don't want to talk.

Do remember that arbitration isn't mediation. ;) Arbitration is a step removed from the case going to court, and any decision arrived at on it is binding and enforced.
By Wolfman
#13754998
Oh, come on now House, we both know that corporations all the time decide they don't feel like playing by the rules.
User avatar
By Tribbles
#13756285
There would need to be some kind of punishment system possible for workers or unions that don't want to talk.


I know the perfect one!

Let the corporations have the power even if some of the unions (labour, bosses, experts, whatever) chooses to withdraw. The thing that happens, is that they loose their voice and vote.

Hatred of Jews in not the oldest hatred in the wo[…]

As N.I. Bukharin and E. Preobrazhensky demonstrat[…]

Women have in professional Basketball 5-6 times mo[…]

There were no barricades. Everyone was able to ac[…]