Finnish unions screwing up BAD

[David Floyd]

I understand that. My point was that if you are really going to talk about supply and demand of labor as it applies to why workers can get away with striking to fulfill unreasonable demands, then you should understand that supply and demand works both ways.

Tattila,

There needs to be a balance. In many areas of the world, it seems as if the laws are heavily biased in favor of workers and against businesses. If I own a business, and 1/4 of my employees decided to strike in order to double their salary, I should have the option to simply replace them.

[VetLegion]

David, I agree with you in principle. Employement is a contract, if employees aren't working the employer should be able to terminate the contract.

What I'm trying to tell you is that when the government is the employer it isn't easy to say what "unreasonable demands" are. How much should the government spend on A (something) and how much on B (nurse pay)? Who can say? Striking is a legitimate way to try to get more money.

[David Floyd]

Well, from a medical ethics point of view, putting patients at risk in order to secure more money for treating them is pretty iffy, to say the least. Any medical ethics board that Finnish nurses might be responsible to should hit them with some VERY serious penalties, IMO.

Additionally, the free market should be able to define reasonable vs. unreasonable - I agree that striking is an important part of a free market. But so is being able to fire and replace strikers when they get out of line. It's not as if anyone WANTS to - turnover isn't cheap, especially, I would imagine, in the medical profession. But sometimes the costs of allowing people to strike to their hearts content outweights the costs of replacing them, and both governments and business should be able to make that determination.