Public Labor Unions Are Beneficial to Society

In this final round, I will attempt to offer a defense concerning my original arguments1. LABOUR EFFICIENCY1.1. Workers' contentmentMy opponent attack my point about productivity as a result of collective bargaining rights by saying unions are undemocratic. He says union membership can sometimes be a condition for employment, but I do not see how that is undemocratic. It is just the same as any condition; except this one actually offers benefits to the employee as well as the employer. As for unions who consider termination of membership secession, I do not see how unions can fire a worker since they have no direct jurisdiction over employment. Then, he says unions reward for membership, which is correct, but not in the way he understands it. If one is the member of a union, he reaps the reward of having a powerful, fair negotiator on his side. I do not see how this promotes sloth (as said in round 3), or this is unfair, since everyone has a chance to join a union. My opponent then argues that unions compress wages. I must point out it seems my opponent thinks unions are all-powerful. It must be said that unions have an indirect, negotiating influence and all "union contracts" are a result of a negotiation process between the union and employer. No union can enforce anything without holding talks with the workers and employer. He then repeats his argument about unemployment, but as I've already pointed out, unions do not increase unemployment; they simply improve conditions for the currently employed.1.2. Working timeMy opponent repeats his argument about sloth, and I see no need to repeat what I've said. I will only point out that it is logical that a negotiating process involving a certain plan will last less that one that is unorganized, without a strong negotiator, and as such decrease productivity and working time. Then we hear the point about how unions resist new technology, which is illogical - since the strive to improve the workplace, they will most definitely accept new technology. My opponent then asks me if I have any evidence, to which I reply that I already offered a source proving this in round 2.2. BENEFITS TO SOCIETAL VALUES AND ECONOMY2.1. Societal valuesMy opponent bases his rebuttal on the point that capitalism has given workers the rights they deserve. I must then ask why is it that capitalism brought on both of the greates economical crises, why is it that capitalism is causing the world's economy to fall apart, and unemployment rates to skyrocket? Unions are necessary to stop corporate capitalism from, as Ambrose Bierce said "achieving individual profit without individual responsibility" [1] , to give the workers rights as opposed to the employers and protect class equality; which is definitely a value we should strive to achieve. My opponent then goes as far to point out unions will stop unemployed workers from getting jobs through violence, while he has no evidence for his claims. One cannot simply throw such accusations around without proof. Unemployed workers, if not members of a union, cffer their services for whatever amount of money they wish. Unless my opponent can prove that unions control any and all spheres of the labour market, his rebuttal is completely illogical.2.2. Economic benefitsThe point about absenteeism is directly countered by the evidence I've already offered through this debate. As for tariffs, they protect domestic producers as a whole, creating competition between different producers on the domestic market. Competition forces producers to improve the quality of their goods, improving the domestic market, and forming a strong domestic base [2]. Without a strong domestic market, one must resort to large amounts of imports and can easily fall into foreign debt. Thus, I've proven tariffs are good for the market. Finally, my opponent attacks the graph I've offered as being old, which may be true and in that case I apologize, but the graph my opponent offers still shows that more people approve of unions than dissaprove. And, if my opponent claims this is an ad populum fallacy, then why does he offer the percentage of workers that voted to have a union in their workplace (round 3)? Is that not also an ad populum fallacy? After all this, I believe it has been proven that labour unions are beneficial to society. I once again thank my opponent for the debate. Sources:[1] . http://www.brainyquote.com...[2] . http://www.apo-tokyo.org...