🚀 go-pugleaf

In response to my:

> >It consists of this:  My labour is mine.  I decide whom to sell it
> >to, and under what conditions.  If I do not like the conditions, I
> >am not obliged to sell my labour.  If my conditions offend a third
> >party, the third party does not have the right to prevent me from
> >selling my labour.  I do not have to join somebody's club in order
> >to sell my labour.

the gin sing wrote:
 
> Your employer, the person you want to sell you labour to, has, prior to your
> arrival on the scene signed a contract with the employees he already has.
> If you are not willing to abide by the terms and conditions of the collective
> agreement the employer signed - then why would you want to work for that
> employer?

A contract that limits rights guaranteed by law is an invalid contract.  My
point is that a labourer's ownership of her labour gives her the right to work.
A contract that prevents someone from employing me restricts this right.  Such
contracts are only legal in places like BC where this right to work is not
protected by law.


> When you talk about selling your labour and being prevented from doing so,
> you are again talking as if a collective agreement that involves the employer
> doesn't exist.  It does.  No, you don't HAVE to join the club - but if you
> insist on using the club's facilities you will be expected to pay a facility fee.

First of all, a closed shop means thet you do HAVE to join the club.  Secondly,
what facilities?  If I am willing to work for an employer under the same terms
as a collective agreement that she has with her unionized employees, I have the
right to.  You can't patent a collective agreement.  Thirdly, as explained above,
a collective agreement that walks all over rights guaranteed by law is illegal.

> >>  There are a number of different types of shops and
> >> there are very few closed shops any longer
> >
> >Hello.  This is B.C.  Check the title of the thread.

snip 

> No, what it makes a mockery of is the continual yelping by individuals
> that they want to pay their own way - but when they clearly derive
> benefit - they don't actually want a user pay system - they want an
> "anybody but me" pay system.

I will repeat to be more clear.  Legislation allowing closed shops makes a
mockery of freedom of association because it forces workers to join associations
against their will in order to be employed.  This is wrong.  We can not
call ourselves a free country if we do not uphold the freedom to 'not join' a
union.


> You seemed awfully upset that the students in Toronto mashed up
> the leg.  You seemed to support the rule of democracy over the
> overthrow of democratically elected by even anyone.

What are you talking about?


> >If you are not free to 'not join' then you are not free.
> 
> Can't be bothered, eh?  Or just don't think you can win on
> promoting your ideas to your fellow workers?

To repeat:  If you are not free to 'not join' then you are not free.

Michael Kyba