You choosing to take the statement as chastising means you still have shame. So there's still some hope yet.
It wasn't my intention, but there's ultimately no other way to describe someone who chooses not to participate in a community effort as "selfish". And that's not some judgement call per se; everyone needs to be a bit selfish to work hard, push forward, and advance their lives. The degree and cost of the selfishness is where it starts to cross from individual actions to a character trait. But I digress.
>Today, it's asking me to individually give up a little in order to collectively gain a little, while adding additional complexity and a second parallel bureaucracy to my workplace.
But you keep falling into the same circular logic. We can agree that powers have been reduced. But we get those powers back by having people give up a little. The more people who give up a little, the more we all gain. Saying that that's not worth it weakens the entire cause.
>I'll vote in favor of fixing the law, and once the law is fixed, I'll be more interested in letting a union represent me.
I hope you do. But who do you think gets those laws proposed and put on the ballot? The stronger the coalition (which is simply a more general form of "union of people to pursue a common goal), the stronger chance we actually get a bill to vote on. And these companies are really good at killing stuff off while it's still in the boring proposal phase.