> You seem to misunderstand what unionisation is. The current state of things has been reached as kind of a gentleman's agreement. If employers want to revert to life threatening solutions, unions will revert to life threatening solutions too. Sequestration, destruction, tarring, and other fun things.
Weird, my definition of "unionization" is "workers bargaining collectively". It doesn't involve any veiled threats of violence.
That is what it means, but it's an arrangement that replaces the previously "we'll resolve this with violence" situation. If one party wants to dump the "new" way of doing things, mostly likely it just goes back to the "old" way.
Weird, my definition of "unionization" is "workers bargaining collectively". It doesn't involve any veiled threats of violence.