If I had a company, I would like to have the right to make bad decisions. And who defines good and bad decisions.
With unions, in the end you have courts decide on economic decisions. That's bullshit.
Unilateral control over a business's destiny can doom it if the leadership is making poor decisions even when the rank-and-file oppose them. It's all easy to say the company should simply go to ruins but why should it? What if the good or service is solid, should the customers and the market suffer because the failing company has deprived them of it? Should the workers be punished because they had insufficient leverage to oppose those decisions? Should a ton of money and effort be wasted for an apparently pointless enterprise? If we live in a society that seeks to maximize life expectancy, and if corporations are people, why should we not seek also to prevent avoidable business failures, at least for those enterprises that are building useful products?
> If I had a company, I would like to have the right to make bad decisions. And who defines good and bad decisions.
Feel free to do that in a company of 1. As soon as your company exceeds 1 person, you lose the absolute right. You lose the right when your decisions impact the livelihood of those around you. It doesn't drop to zero instantly but it is attenuated as the company grows.
If you work for a company and you feel they are making bad decisions and perhaps your job is in peril (because the company may go down), it is high time to look for a new job.
And again, who then decides what is or is not a bad decision? Courts will get to decide on economic decisions. But lawyers have studied law, not economics. How does that make sense?
Someone you hire to redo your kitchen isn't employed by you, they're employed by their employer, where everything we talked about makes sense. That's why there's a distinction between an employer-employee relationship and a contracting relationship.
They of course get a say in how your kitchen is done: if it's not up to code, or dangerous, they absolutely have a say. And frequently. When I redid my kitchen my GC pointed out all these things to me and modified I my plans.
> If you work for a company and you feel they are making bad decisions and perhaps your job is in peril (because the company may go down), it is high time to look for a new job.
You're re-stating how it is today, but there's no reason it need to be this way, and it fails to meet the fiduciary duty to the company and its shareholders.
> And again, who then decides what is or is not a bad decision? Courts will get to decide on economic decisions. But lawyers have studied law, not economics. How does that make sense?
You don't need a law degree to know harassment is wrong. In fact mandatory training is part of your, wait for it, fiduciary duty. You don't need a degree to recognize bad management.
Of course they can have opinions or refuse to do things in certain ways. But they can't force you to have a pink wall color, or other things. At most, perhaps if the see something dangerous or illegal in your kitchen, they may have a duty to do something about it.
Likewise, an employee can refuse to do things by simply quitting the job.
Harassment: again, quit your job, apart from that, general laws about harassment should apply, independent from you being an employee or not.
"fiduciary duty" - where does that come from? Why does somebody suddenly have a duty to take care of you? I am self employed. Why do you get people to have the duty to take care of you, but I don't? Who should have the duty to take care of me?
Suppose you pay me to renovate your kitchen.
Now what is your duty towards me? Is it now your duty to see that I earn a living wage and have job security forever? All just because you simply wanted a new wall color in your kitchen?
> Of course they can have opinions or refuse to do things in certain ways. But they can't force you to have a pink wall color, or other things. At most, perhaps if the see something dangerous or illegal in your kitchen, they may have a duty to do something about it.
You're not their employer, you're contracting their employer.
> Harassment: again, quit your job, apart from that, general laws about harassment should apply, independent from you being an employee or not.
No thanks, that's an objectively worse world.
> Why do you get people to have the duty to take care of you, but I don't? Who should have the duty to take care of me?
Because that's what running a business is. Since you're self employed you have that responsibility to look after yourself.
> Now what is your duty towards me? Is it now your duty to see that I earn a living wage and have job security forever? All just because you simply wanted a new wall color in your kitchen?
Nope, that's their employers duty.