Labor Unions in the REALLY Free Market

[Lumpen Bourgeois]

This question is primarily directed to the market anarchists and anarcho-capitalists who frequent this forum, but others are welcome to share their input as well.

In your view, could labor unions possibly exist in a free market completely unfettered by government intervention?

[Die Rote Fahne]

Unions are antithetical to the free market

[Bright Banana Beard]

Union limited the individual's wants and thus can takeover the property. Yet, they protect the owner from the union due to the importance of the property rather than the importance of men.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

I can predict their answer:

"Yes, unions can exist in a free market, but bosses are also free to fire anyone at any time for any reason, so they can fire all workers who join a union, for example."

[JimmyJazz]

I can predict their answer:

"Yes, unions can exist in a free market, but bosses are also free to fire anyone at any time for any reason, so they can fire all workers who join a union, for example."

Right, and practically speaking, all the measures that make a union strong - like the closed shop - would be out of the question.

Labor unions wouldn't provide much protection in a free market anyway. Workers need to be organized as a class to prevent the worst abuses, which necessarily means their demands will take a political form. Local struggles are much, much too easy for a capitalist(s) to defeat--for instance, he can just pick up his factory and move (even to another country, as is happening in today's globalized labor market). And he can always find workers desperate enough that they're willing to scab. Or he can use illegal immigrants, who aren't protected by existing labor/wage laws. And so on.

[Havet]

Labor Unions would definitely exist in Free Markets with Equality of Opportunity. They would play a very important role in protecting the (few) workers who were employed and decided to try and increase their working conditions.

What "ancaps" usually argue is that : "oh, since unions today are so powerful due to lobbying the government then they won't exist when there is no government", which is ,of course, illogical.

[h0m0revolutionary]

Unions are antithetical to the free market

Really? could have fooled me, for I see the Unions all around me, doing the job of the bosses too.

Unions capitulated to capital long ago, they had to in order to survive, they exist only to mediate equally between employer and employee, seeking a deal that suits both.

A greater share of the pie is nice and all, but as revolutionaries, we shouldn't fool ourselves that organs that seek to negotiate mildly better deals for workers (when they aren't doing backhand deals with social-democrat governments or negotiating away your workplace rights) are revolutionary.

We certainly shouldn't alledge they're forces counterposed to the free market, when everyday reality shows this is be false, they're part and parcel of modern capitalism and serve a very specific function within.

[Havet]

We certainly shouldn't alledge they're forces counterposed to the free market, when everyday reality shows this is be false, they're part and parcel of modern capitalism and serve a very specific function within.

And you certainly shouldn't alledge that there is currently a free market at all.

[Raúl Duke]

Unions in a free market might end up like prior to the introduction of many important labor laws.

However, one thing that could result is a more militant workers/unions (if we look at at the past)...although the factor that today's economy is very globalized might makes matters different then in the past (prior to the 1930s/50s).

One downside would be that capitalists would also use prior tactics such as hiring thugs (i.e. the historical use of pinkerton guards) to attack striking workers probably to the point where, let's say that the U.S. ended up in a libertarian's economy, the capitalist class would even use death squads.

In the case of anarcho-capitalism, it could even be more possibly worse since the capitalist class will have direct control of private police forces and such,

[Lumpen Bourgeois]

Labor Unions would definitely exist in Free Markets with Equality of Opportunity. They would play a very important role in protecting the (few) workers who were employed and decided to try and increase their working conditions.

What "ancaps" usually argue is that : "oh, since unions today are so powerful due to lobbying the government then they won't exist when there is no government", which is ,of course, illogical.

Actually I think I agree, at least partially, with the ancaps who argue that labor unions couldn't exist in the free market. How would unions exsit to any substantial extent without closed shops or union shops(both of which are usually legislated)?

Of course, there are market anarchists and some ancaps who believe wholeheatedly that labor unions would surely thrive in the context of the free market. But I find their position utterly paradoxical. On one hand, they say that businesses wouldn't dare to join forces for long term benefits and form monopolies, oligopolies or cartels, but labor certainly will (for some reason) eschew short term gain and band together for the long term advantage of stronger bargaining power. I find their position to be illogical. Either admit that labor unions won't exist significantly in the free market or rescind on the claim that monopolies wouldn't form.

[RGacky3]

I have a feeling that in a totally free market without the state, unions would take over the means of production pretty fast.


They would play a very important role in protecting the (few) workers who were employed and decided to try and increase their working conditions.


The role a union plays is 100% dependant on what the workers want it to play (I'm talking about a purely democratic union of coarse.

[Havet]

I have a feeling that in a totally free market without the state, unions would take over the means of production pretty fast.



The role a union plays is 100% dependant on what the workers want it to play (I'm talking about a purely democratic union of coarse.


Oh yes of course. After all, the Union is merely a group of workers who have decided to gather into searching for a common goal in their working place. Yes i think we would see many unions taking over the MOP (although the vast majority of unions would start the MOP by themselves instead of taking it over).

[Havet]

Actually I think I agree, at least partially, with the ancaps who argue that labor unions couldn't exist in the free market. How would unions exsit to any substantial extent without closed shops or union shops(both of which are usually legislated)?

What's a closed shop or a union shop? What does it matter if they are legislated now?


On one hand, they say that businesses wouldn't dare to join forces for long term benefits and form monopolies, oligopolies or cartels

Oh they will dare, but they will fail miserably.


but labor certainly will (for some reason) eschew short term gain and band together for the long term advantage of stronger bargaining power. I find their position to be illogical. Either admit that labor unions won't exist significantly in the free market or rescind on the claim that monopolies wouldn't form.

How does one affect the other? Yes, labor unions won't be able to form great monopolies and oligarchies, just as businesses won't be able to, how does that lead to your proposition that they will? The fact businesses can currently increase their size and power so much, just as unions have also achieved it, is through state power.

[yuon]

Free market types often don't mind if business bosses get together to fix prices, yet do mind if workers band together for the same purpose.

In any truly free market (assuming that such a thing could exist, and I believe that it could only exist as part of a broader anarchistic society) there would of course be a role for unions, made up of the workers who still worked for others. However, I would suggest that there would be much less of a need, for it would be easy for such people to leave and work for themselves, or for one of the various communes. Employers who insisted on paying less than the full value of the labour of a worker would find that no one would work for them. And consequently, be forced to either pay the full value of a person's labour, or do without.

What use is there for a union then in such a system? Well, if nothing else, it would provide a good place to share information about employers, provide opportunities for people to meet and interact, and so on.

[Havet]

Free market types often don't mind if business bosses get together to fix prices, yet do mind if workers band together for the same purpose.

In any truly free market (assuming that such a thing could exist, and I believe that it could only exist as part of a broader anarchistic society) there would of course be a role for unions, made up of the workers who still worked for others. However, I would suggest that there would be much less of a need, for it would be easy for such people to leave and work for themselves, or for one of the various communes. Employers who insisted on paying less than the full value of the labour of a worker would find that no one would work for them. And consequently, be forced to either pay the full value of a person's labour, or do without.

What use is there for a union then in such a system? Well, if nothing else, it would provide a good place to share information about employers, provide opportunities for people to meet and interact, and so on.

Good post.

[Lumpen Bourgeois]

What's a closed shop or a union shop? What does it matter if they are legislated now?

Closed Shop (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_shop) and Union Shop (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_shop). Essentially, when legislated, they give labor unions increased bargaining power vis-a-vis the employer.



How does one affect the other? Yes, labor unions won't be able to form great monopolies and oligarchies, just as businesses won't be able to, how does that lead to your proposition that they will? The fact businesses can currently increase their size and power so much, just as unions have also achieved it, is through state power.

Labor unions are essentially a group of workers who agree to band together to demand an increase in their wages, among other things. Do you see the parallel now? A cartel is a group of businesses who, through collective action, set prices and production.

What I'm saying is that if you believe that labor unions could survive in the free market, why not cartels and other unions between firms?

[Havet]

Closed Shop (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_shop) and Union Shop (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_shop). Essentially, when legislated, they give labor unions increased bargaining power vis-a-vis the employer. Thanks for links


Labor unions are essentially a group of workers who agree to band together to demand an increase in their wages, among other things. Do you see the parallel now? A cartel is a group of businesses who, through collective action, set prices and production.

What I'm saying is that if you believe that labor unions could survive in the free market, why not cartels and other unions between firms?

Cartels do not survive because of various factors, like potential competition, indirect competition and the "over-agglomeration tactic". Check them out in my post here (http://pensarismo.blogspot.com/2009/07/dismantling-natural-monopoly.html)

[Lumpen Bourgeois]

Cartels do not survive because of various factors, like potential competition, indirect competition and the "over-agglomeration tactic". Check them out in my post here (http://pensarismo.blogspot.com/2009/07/dismantling-natural-monopoly.html)

The post doesn't take into account markets with high barriers to entry through high fixed costs or sunk costs, markets that are not contestable due to imperfect competition, etc.

But, lets go back to the main topic. Even if we were to assume away all those market imperfections, do you honestly believe labor unions won't suffer from the same problems? Employers could always hire other workers who aren't union members if he finds the labor union's demands unreasonable. Also, employers could substitute machinery for workers in order to break the union, which is an example of "indirect competition" at work.

If we embrace the free market utopia as fact, then labor unions should not exist for any substantive amount of time.