Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by whimsicalism 1915 days ago
> This is suggesting the government should treat unions preferentially, not equitably.

Equity is in the eye of the beholder. I don't see how this law is treating unions preferentially, and am interested in how you distinguish it with the aforementioned minority shareholder protections.
1 comments
fastball 1915 days ago
The idea here seems to be that unions can interfere with the running of a business however they want (strikes, etc), but businesses should not be allowed to "interfere" with the formation of union, where "interfere" seems to be a very low bar in terms of what is unacceptable.

When I say equitable treatment, I'm looking for symmetry, and I'm not seeing it here.

link
cma 1915 days ago
Seems like you are saying owners of small businesses can get together and collude under a combined business, with shares and voting, but individual workers must be atomized or if they do try to coordinate to bargain against the businesses, they get no similar help to do so as the shareholders get.
link