Should Workers Be Allowed to Strike? - Argumentative Essay
It is difficult to see how anyone could deny that all workers should have the rights to strike. This is because striking gives workers freedom of speech. This is justifiable, because Britain is a democratic nation.
<br>
<br>My first reason supporting the motion that workers should be allowed to strike is in order to bring to the fore poor safety conditions. For instance, in the nuclear power industry, any breaches of safety can have tragic consequences. If the employees are exposed to nuclear material, this could lead to serious illnesses such as cancer, leukaemia and radiation sickness. Radioactive material could also affect residents of the surrounding area, as in the case of the Chernobyl disaster. In the light of poor safety conditions, workers striking can be justified by the fact that the government and public would be informed.
<br>
<br>Similarly, another justification for employees striking is that production and confidence would perhaps increase after industrial action. This could be because, when workers strike for higher pay or better conditions and their employers meet their demands, the employees return to their place of work with higher morale than before the walk-out. As a consequence, the higher productivity would be beneficial to the owners.
<br>
<br>Likewise, industrial action gives the worker a line of protest against unfair hours or miserly wages. Theoretically, if taking industrial action was outlawed, the management could impose any terms and contract changes that they wished on their personnel. On the contrary, in reality the only effective option that skilled labourers have when their firm underpay them is down tools and walk out. This would ensure that the proprietors would have to negotiate with the unions, as skilled workers are difficult to locate.
<br>
<br>Furthermore, if the workers belonging to one trade union walk out, the situation may be intensified by the fact that one trade union's leaders can call on an allied union's members to
<br>
<br>My first reason supporting the motion that workers should be allowed to strike is in order to bring to the fore poor safety conditions. For instance, in the nuclear power industry, any breaches of safety can have tragic consequences. If the employees are exposed to nuclear material, this could lead to serious illnesses such as cancer, leukaemia and radiation sickness. Radioactive material could also affect residents of the surrounding area, as in the case of the Chernobyl disaster. In the light of poor safety conditions, workers striking can be justified by the fact that the government and public would be informed.
<br>
<br>Similarly, another justification for employees striking is that production and confidence would perhaps increase after industrial action. This could be because, when workers strike for higher pay or better conditions and their employers meet their demands, the employees return to their place of work with higher morale than before the walk-out. As a consequence, the higher productivity would be beneficial to the owners.
<br>
<br>Likewise, industrial action gives the worker a line of protest against unfair hours or miserly wages. Theoretically, if taking industrial action was outlawed, the management could impose any terms and contract changes that they wished on their personnel. On the contrary, in reality the only effective option that skilled labourers have when their firm underpay them is down tools and walk out. This would ensure that the proprietors would have to negotiate with the unions, as skilled workers are difficult to locate.
<br>
<br>Furthermore, if the workers belonging to one trade union walk out, the situation may be intensified by the fact that one trade union's leaders can call on an allied union's members to