>From: m <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Subject: Re: reforming education
>Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 22:40:22 -0700 (PDT)
>--- "Michael S. Lorrey" <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Brian D Williams wrote:
> > >
> > > From: "Michael S. Lorrey" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>[ Education union resistance to laptop distribution to
> > > >Stupid is as union does....
> > >
> > > Sorry Mike we don't agree on this one. The vast
> > majority of
> > > scientists in this country are Union, and even the
> > doctors are
> > > organizing now.... Every right you have in the
> > workplace was won
> > > for all workers by the effort of Union labor.
> > Unions once were an effective means of collective
> > bargaining, and may
> > still play a part in some professions, however any
> > profession that is
> > based on knowledge and intelligence has no rational
> > need, IMNSHO, for a
> > union unless there evolves some sort of monopoly
> > buyer of professional
> > labor. Unions were needed when there were only three
> > steel companies,
> > one oil company, three car companies, etc, and
> > anyone who worked in
> > those industries was dependent on those companies
> > for their living. If
> > these conditions are not met, then it is the union
> > that is trying to
> > manipulate and extort the market.
>But what if the *companies* collude (or compete)to
>reduce conditions? Then there will be no real
>alternatives; people would be forced to accept lower
>conditions. After all, if a company can reduce its
>overhead by reducing conditions, others might try to
>follow suit. In such a case labour needs
>representation, as much as any other interest group
>(including employers) does.
> > The ABA, the AMA,
> > the NEA and others
> > are IMHO manipulative, extortionary unions that
> > should have anti-trust
> > actions taken against THEM.
>Ok, but a right to representation is still important.
> > Stockholders will thus maintain pressure on
> > management to prevent
> > excessive union concessions.
>But for the same reasons, they are likely to do it to
>conditions for *non-unionised* labour..
>So what do employees do then?
What if we ALL joined one big union? Actually, I believe that this was the IWW goal. An explicit voluntary social contract spelling out the rules by which we negotiated and resolved disagreements. Won't we be needing something like this when we share upload space? What about a universal web social contract.