[Zyx]

Workers in a strike are justified in physically preventing strike-breakers from entering the place of work?

Justify your answer.

[dilpill]

I strongly disagree.

[ingliz]

Strongly agree, Scabs are class traitors

[Xopolis]

Baseball bats, machetes, pipe bombs, whatever it takes.

[Dave]

Strongly disagree, even if I understand the impulse.

[FallenRaptor]

Strongly agreed.

[Nets]

Strongly disagree, even if I understand the impulse.

Exactly my view. Worker's have the right to strike, they don't have the right to tell other workers what to do.

A caveat I could see is if a union voted to strike, picketers preventing other union members from working, this seems fair, they are in it together.

Of course, this is dangerous because of closed shops and the like.

[Dave]

I don't agree there is any right to strike either. I see nothing wrong with firing strikers and hiring replacements, which the ILO "forbids". US law allows scabs to be hired if they're permanent replacements, but I don't have a problem with them being temporary either.

I also have no problem with closed shops. If the workers and the company agree, then that's fine. Unions can assist in worker training and boost productivity if they (and management) have the right mindset.

[hanno]

Disagree - and with the whole 'right to work' thing. I've seen steelworkers get in trouble for running into a below-grade grease fire, no small thing, electricity, smoke, standing hydraulic juice, having just explicitly agreed with safety not to do it after a similar event earlier in the week, but they couldn’t restrain themselves - and when the work is there they'd do 16-hour shifts perpetually if allowed to. All that said, this kindof thing - why do you think car insurance sucks, some flaw in capitalism best explained in shrill high-minded platitudes or that the consumer is expected to act as a supplier - front and center with a clean record, the deal taker as opposed to deal maker.

Entities given the needed leverage by government will fling the turd to whoever’s up the line to the greatest extent possible, act against the cash flow – there’s a killing to be made in just that. Much is made that the free market is incomplete, but people think ‘legal tender for all debts public/private’ is a joke so it’s circular logic. Also, not every non-represented employee is the man - last time the mill hands I knew did their thing, before my time, a secretary who made half what they did got cut when they broke a window. I’ve got nothing against being hard on the help, but it just goes to show, they’ll never be cool as long as they can start shit.

[Vera Politica]

Strongly Agree. This will always be a problem so long as capitalism necessitates unemployment and a reserve force of workers. That the condition of these workers isn't hopeless, state intervention and laws seems to work in these situations. However, if the situation of the unemployed were desperate, then the power of a worker to strike would be meaningless and this is precisely the necessity of unemployment. The workers are entirely justified in cracking the heads of class traitors - however if it were a situation of unemployed helplessness then we would need some rethinking.

I am skeptical of the idea of 'justification' though, if you're asking whether or not I would do it, then I would. If you're asking whether or not workers should a have the ability to do so, then yes. I even believe all workers should be armed, and they decide to strike they should shoot scabs without hesitation.

[Oddity]

Strongly disagree. I agree 100% with Dave.

You can protest if you want to, but you can't force a business to shut down by keeping their workers out, keeping a customer out, etc., unless the business itself agrees with that. I would extend this also to striking in the middle of the road, blocking public transportation, etc. That ought to be illegal.

Also, companies should be allowed to choose their own employees, too, which means that they should be allowed to fire workers for striking, unionizing, etc.

[Dr House]

capitalism necessitates unemployment and a reserve force of workers.

There are developed capitalist states with less than 1%, or even 0% unemployment.

Capitalism works badly under the weight of policies that artificially raise employment (overstaffing makes firms clumsy, and an excessively large payroll could prevent business expansion).

[Cheesecake_Marmalade]

Strongly disagree. I don't necessarily believe in unions either.

[ingliz]

Also, companies should be allowed to choose their own employees, too, which means that they should be allowed to fire workers for striking, unionizing, etc.

Workers can choose who they work with too!

Let me guess an American? Why is it that Americans cannot see the power of organised labour and are so keen to kiss arse. Capital is helpless without labour so why shouldn't workers combine and exploit that power to improve wages and conditions. As for blacklegs, their working lives should be made miserable and union labour should refuse to work with them. Factories are dangerous places at the best of times - Accidents can happen - Scabs should be made aware of that fact in no uncertain terms.

[Dr House]

Let me guess an American? Why is it that Americans cannot see the power of organised labour and are so keen to kiss arse.

I have thus far had two non-union jobs, and one union job.

Union membership has so far got me the privilege of a 20-cent-an-hour premium over minimum wage, which I ended up having to hand over in the form of union dues anyway (which I never bothered to).

Workforce skills are a better way to get more money and opportunity than unions.

[ingliz]

There are developed capitalist states with less than 1%, or even 0% unemployment

You do come out with rubbish sometimes, name your mythical state? Or are you counting a few rich Arab Emirates who make work for their citizens and hire and fire foreign labour; Their reserve army of labour being the entire Indian sub-continent

[Dr House]

Monaco: 0%
Guernsey: 0.9%
Iceland: 1%
Liechtenstein: 1.3%
Denmark: 1.6%
Singapore: 1.6%

Source

[ingliz]

Monaco has a real unemployment rate among Monagesques of 22%(estimated 1999). They just hop over to France and live and work there. 84% of residents are wealthy foreigners who have no need to work. The CIA figures are complete bunkum! The Monaco government has stopped publishing the figures, the latest official number published, that I can find, showed a rate of 3.1%(1998) which is misleading to say the least.

[peter_co]

Why is it that Americans cannot see the power of organised labour and are so keen to kiss arse.

Much opposition to organized labor in the US comes not from not being familiar enough with organized labour, but rather knowing it all too well. Many of the problems plaguing the American manufacturing sector can be traced back to unions forcing excessively generous contracts that today have almost completely destroyed the viability of various companies. Also, many unions have behaved almost like crime families (and some have actually been connected to organized crime), coercing individuals to join them by means such as the one you suggested when you said:

As for blacklegs, their working lives should be made miserable and union labour should refuse to work with them. Factories are dangerous places at the best of times - Accidents can happen - Scabs should be made aware of that fact in no uncertain terms.

It's no wonder that many Americans have grown disgusted with unions in light of such attitudes and problems.

[Oxymoron]

What gives people on strike the right to deny other people rights?