tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5037190876571380696.post5433738401847707844..comments2023-11-25T03:11:51.759-06:00Comments on On Today's Page: Gang members are not interested in the up-to-date kitchen or ...Denis Drewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11833367196756465896noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5037190876571380696.post-69242628632916771812017-03-29T11:15:33.503-05:002017-03-29T11:15:33.503-05:00MY REPLY TO A FELLOW COMMENTER ON ECONOMIST'S ...MY REPLY TO A FELLOW COMMENTER ON ECONOMIST'S VIEW LINKS:<br /><br /><br />There is something we can do. We can start to protect collective bargaining at the state by state level.<br /><br />Old saw is that federal preemption cuts states out of protecting collective bargaining rights. But just because Congress never included felony prosecution for union busting doesn't mean Congress did not want anyone else to -- and would not have mattered if Congress did not want it. All state protection does is reinforce the (toothless) federal set-up.<br /><br />Congress could not constitutionally pass a law that states may not protect bargaining (OF ANY KIND!) from being muscled. No more than Congress may prevent states from making their own minimum wages (which Republicans would have tried a long time ago if it were possible).<br /><br />Jimmy Hoffa said: "A union is a business." There is no reason one business (owner) should have carte blanche to bust the bargaining power of another business (labor) in a democracy.<br /><br />Progressive state to start with: WA, OR, CA, NV, MN, IL, MA, NY, MD, etc.<br /><br />And don't forget to get around to centralized bargaining (like the Teamster's National Master Freight Agreement -- or, where else, German, Denmark, etc.). Supermarket and airline workers (especially employees under RLA) would kill for (legally mandated?) centralized bargaining.<br /><br />Reply Wednesday, March 29, 2017 at 07:23 AM Denis Drewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11833367196756465896noreply@blogger.com