Posted by Joe Baker on September 11, 2000 at 23:20:25:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Strike Votes _vs_ mgmt -vs- union-bustin posted by Jay Bertolet on September 11, 2000 at 19:55:44:
Jay,
I didn't write the message from 'concerned', but share some (but not all) of the same thoughts.
I first want to dispense with the notion that those of us who are opposed to the union concept are 'bitter' about it. I've been accused of this EXACT same attribute when expressing an anti-union sentiment. We simply have an opinion, just as you do.
You have stated the case FOR collective bargaining, and there are many people who would agree with all you've said. Others of us, however, believe that freedom is the most important consideration. The philosophy is that whoever is writing the checks should be free to hire whom they like, and fire whom they like, and the players should be free to accept, reject, or negotiate any offer received.
If you go to a restaurant for six months, and suddenly they quit serving good food, do you continue to go to it, or do you go elsewhere? You go elsewhere. You 'fire' the restaurant. Are you "nothing more than a child who plays with a toy for a time and then wants another toy, discarding the first"? Of course not! You are merely exercising your freedom!
If the product is not good, it will be replaced by someone making a better product. In this way, the best musicians at any one time will be employed by the best orchestras. Every other profession works this way. To mirror your hypothetical situation, a new manager comes into a company, brings some of his people, displaces some of the ones who are there, lays some off, hires some more. It happens every day in business, and it works fine! And, yes, I've been the guy who got the axe a few times. It hurt, but I usually wound up in a better position. You will not have the same security, but as you said, you are "making art".
Turn things around for a minute. Suppose the orchestras got together and 'bargained collectively', agreeing not to hire players who are under contract to other orchestras, or agreeing that none of them would pay more than a certain dollar figure. You would be robbed of your freedom. Would you like it? I doubt it!
This is a matter of philosophy and principle. I hope we can see each others' viewpoints, disagree at times, and still be friends.
As to why 'concerned' didn't give his identity, you know why he did that. The almost violent opposition to this viewpoint is pretty intimidating. Take a look at the response I get!
All this said, I do wish you well. You seem like a tremendous person, and I respect and admire you; I just disagree about this one issue.
Joe "Disagreeing without being disagreeable" Baker