And you don't think there's even the remotest chance that it could be the employer that's done something wrong occasionally? Or that even if the employee has done something wrong, that the action taken against them was unjustified?
by Vinnie
defending 'innocent' people at tribunals, (surely if it has got as far as a tribunal they must have done something wrong).
Your position is like saying that if someone is charged with a crime, they must have done something wrong, and therefore they shouldn't be allowed to have a lawyer in court to defend them.
Well, not to be harsh, but I think you would be being a bit of a hypocrite.
The thing is if we have 50%+1 membership it would benefit the whole, but I would feel a bit of a hypocrite if I joined.
Collective bargaining is essentially what trade unions were invented for.
Striking is generally a last resort in that process - after all, what the firefighters are now striking about is the right to enter negotiations about pay and conditions without the government imposing pre-conditions on those negotiations. You may not agree with them, but that's what it's about. It's actually pretty darn rare these days (although there does seem to have been more in the last couple of years, mainly in the public sector), and I seriously doubt any union you would be asked to join would ever consider it as an option anyway.
So.. you could accept that unions do have valid reasons for existing, that they can help workers, as you say, 'benefit the whole'. Or not. Up to you really.