Murray Rothbard said:These privileges have been enshrined in federal law — especially in the Wagner-Taft-Hartley Act, passed originally in 1935, and the Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1931. The latter prohibits the courts from issuing injunctions in cases of imminent union violence; the former compels employers to bargain "in good faith" with any union that wins the votes of the majority of a work unit arbitrarily denned by the federal government — and also prohibits employers from discriminating against union organizers. It was only after the Wagner Act — and its predecessor, the NIRA in 1933 — that labor unions were able to become a powerful force in American life. It was then that unions skyrocketed from something like five percent to over twenty percent of the labor force. Furthermore, local and state laws often protect unions from being sued, and they place restrictions on the employers' hiring of strikebreaking labor; and police are often instructed not to interfere in the use of violence against strikebreakers by union pickets. Take away these special privileges and immunities, and labor unions would sink back to their previous negligible role in the American economy.
Unions were just not a major force in this country until they got special privileges.
Umm, right. I realize that corporations also get special privileges, but so do unions. Unions were just not a major force in this country until they got special privileges.
Those acts were fought for tooth and nail, and were actually compromises to let the revolutionary pressure at the time escape. The collaboration of union leaders with the state is a very effective method of defusing a potentially revolutionary situation. This has historically been proven true. Look at France today, for example.
These acts, BTW, were written for that very purpose: to give union bureaucrats further privileges at the expense of the rank and file.
Uhm, the most active period of worker struggles in the US was in the 10's-30's, before this was passed. And yes, they were a major force - major enough to have these acts passed because of the threat they possessed to the contemporary order.
And? Corporations weren't so popular until limited liability showed up either. It isn't exactly surprising that people would form groups after those groups are given incentives. It should be noted however, that labor laws were created because they were vitally needed at the time. Throwing the unions a bone was needed to ease tensions that otherwise threatened to unbalance the system.
Appeasement? Appeasing the American people? Is that some sort of a bad thing?Is appeasement the best solution to a problem?
Appeasement? Appeasing the American people? Is that some sort of a bad thing?
Perhaps there're some things you don't know about labor history in the US.
What unions were and what they have become are two different things.
No one would even notice labor unions if the division of wealth weren't so far out of whack. This coming from a conservative.
What percentage of industrial workers joined unions? IIRC, during the time period in question, most of the country were residing in rural areas.It wasn't the American people. Such a low percentage of the US population joined in a union, and you say that unions were the American people?
Is appeasement the best solution to a problem?
Wealth isn't divided. It is earned and the people who earn it then decide what to do with it. There is no distribution.
No one would even notice labor unions if the division of wealth weren't so far out of whack. This coming from a conservative.
Of course. The cost of unions is a small price to pay for stability. Failing to do so is what leads to communist revolutions.
Only if you live in a fantasy land where nobody gains wealth through coercion. Corporations and powerful individuals can game the system just like unions can.
a communist revolution would have lasted about a week in the USA
and after it was over there would have been no more communists
Wealth isn't divided. It is earned and the people who earn it then decide what to do with it. There is no distribution.
For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto - Murray N. Rothbard - - Mises Institute
Does anyone think that unions would have been a significant force in this country had it not been for the special privileges afforded them?
Unions were just not a major force in this country until they got special privileges.
I dont know where you're getting your data (I'd love to see it, BTW), but you need to check again.Then why did they have such low numbers joined?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?