Collective Bargaining Issue Michigan – Business Insider
Last night, Michigan’s Republican Governor Rick Snyder signed into law what has now become the standard Republican labor legislation.
It’s called by the euphemism “Right to Work,” and it bans contracts between companies and unions that require all of the company’s workers to pay dues to the union that represents their interests by bargaining against management on their behalf, regarding workers’ wages and other benefits.
Management, of course, represents the corporation’s owners, its stockholders; and management is paid by them to bargain for their collective interests, which are to maximize profits and thus boost the value of their stock.
Every corporation needs owners, and the management is their authorized collective bargaining agent against the other employees, the corporation’s workers.
Every corporation also needs not just owners (stockholders) but also workers. If collective bargaining should be banned on the part of workers, then it should also be banned on the part of stockholders – there can be no fairness to ban collective representation for only one of the two sides of the corporate bargaining table.
What would it mean to ban collective bargaining for stockholders? The management would not be paid by any stockholders who do not want to contribute to paying executives’ salary and benefits. Just as with “Right to Work,” there would then be a “Right to Own” (to extend the Republican euphemism from the other side), which frees owners of the obligation to pay their collective bargainers, the management.
If workers are to be allowed to freeload upon the union that bargains for them, then owners must equally be allowed to freeload upon the management that bargains for them. Freeloaders must be allowed on both sides, if allowed on one side. Isn’t that only fair?