Workers in many occupations want a stronger voice in the workplace and there is increasing recognition that this is a fundamental human right. Do you believe that voice in the workplace is a fundamental human right? Why or why not?
Having a voice in the workplace is not only fundamental, it is part of the dividing line that separates slave labor from free labor. Payment is not the only form of suppression. By eliminating the voice of the employees, you eliminate the company’s ability to grow. A company is not run solely upon the information and opinions provided by management. If employees are not happy and are not being heard, you will have a variety of debilitating consequences.
Growth is critical in a competitive market. The opinions of the people who see your product or offer your service daily is the most important perspective you can gain. Without this critical information, there will be little opportunity to service your customers better. Who better understands the needs of the consumers, then the employees selling or offering your services?
Another issue that you will face, is that a company cannot perform properly without employee morale. Whatever product or service your company may offer, it relies heavily on the employees’ ability to perform their jobs successfully. If an employee feels as if they are not being heard, or their voice doesn’t matter, a lack of motivation will ensure, causing a decrease in profitability for the company.
Unions are absolutely still relevant in today’s society. Unions provide a voice to the masses, where otherwise, they wouldn’t always be represented fairly. It is difficult to rely solely on the companies in America to treat each and every employee fairly. In some cases, where representation is need, unions can bring necessary change.
Unions provide the ability to turn the voice of few in to the very prominent voice of many. In this hypothetical scenario, a large company is not offering a small amount of employees the same living wages and benefits as other, equal employees. That small group of people may not have an opportunity to be heard. However, when they are backed and supported by a large union group, their voice suddenly becomes effective, allowing them to gain the privileges that should have been provided to them, and allows for necessary change.
Has Union membership increased or decreased since World War II in the U.S.? Why do you think that is?
Union membership had decreased, of course, and for a number of reasons. Competition is one of most important factors. More competition in the workforce has made finding a job more about the employee and what the company can offer them as opposed to what the employee has to offer the company. There is not a shortage of jobs and because of that, employees can choose a career that benefits their needs, as opposed to grabbing the first available job, regardless of the consequences of misrepresentation.
Economy has change immensely. The economy is stable, and we do not find the poverty that we saw in the 1940’s and 50’s. Finical security is not as big of a factor as it was during World War II. People believed they needed the unions to represent them, in a time where civil rights were often forgotten, and where many citizens’ civil rights were not the same. We have become more civilized, and are represented more thoroughly in the work place by laws and regulations. This has substantially decreased the need for unions. There is still most certainly a need for them; however, unions have become a perk, and not a necessity.
Reply to classmate #1:
Should soldiers be allowed to join unions? (Hint: consider both the environment and ethics.) Support your answer with a couple of reasons why/why not.
I disagree with the idea that our service men and women should be able to join a union. One of the main, if not the most important roles of the union is to provide a voice to employees that allows them to be heard, often in a situation where their voice may normally go unheard.
The government has laws and regulations, and dedicates an entire section of our government solely to the military. For this reason, the union is not a necessary group for our troops. The military is in the eye of the citizens. There isn’t much room for voices to go unheard, or for mistreatment to occur, simply because they are largely in the lime-light of its citizens.
They also sign a contract of dedication to the United States. I believe this contract should trump all other loyalties or contracts signed by the employee. In this case, the service men or women are supposed to be dedicated solely to their country, not just their own needs.
Can an employer refuse that a Union be created in an organization? Why or why not?
I completely agree on this opinion, that an employer should not have the ability to refuse union activity. Not allowing the opportunity only breeds hostility, whether the opportunity be good to begin with, because employees need to be able to make their own decision on who they believe will represent them best.
Is joining a Union free to employees?
Obviously, joining a union is not free, so I agree. Their union fees do allow them to be represented properly, and show their investment in the organization. It will not be realistic to think that a group would want to represent and support you as a voice to your employer without their being the ability to reap some benefits.
Reply to classmate #2:
Should soldiers be allowed to join unions? (Hint: consider both the environment and ethics.) Support your answer with a couple of reasons why/why not.
I agree with their analysis of this questions. Soldiers are supposed to be dedicated to protecting the rights of its citizens, first and foremost. This is what makes their job stand out from others. Most people, when they are looking for a career, are out to suit their needs the best they can, and rightly so, However, a soldier has an inherent duty that is not to themselves, but the wellbeing of others. This is why they should not be allowed to devote their allegiance to another group such as the union.
Can an employer refuse that a Union be created in an organization? Why or why not?
An employer cannot refuse a Union from having an influence on their organization and its employees. In addition, it should be noted that the union is not always set up positive changes or voice. So, yes, an employer should have the right to persuade its employees not to join a union.
Is joining a Union free to employees?
No, joining a union is not free. However, I disagree that the union would represent employees that are not members in the same way they represent those who are. They would inherently have an obligation to represent those who pay for the services with union dues.
