CONCLUSION

      Historically, the government has played the role of an objective and just intermediary, providing a check and balance in society for the best interest of the public. As the recent trend has shown, the balance of power between businesses and organized unions has shifted significantly in the last few decades. The shifted of power has produced negative and unjustifiable economic consequences to the public. Chapter 2 and chapter 3 explore some of today’s economic and social consequences manufactured as results of an increase concentration of power in businesses while chapter 4 explores historical consequences resulting from increased concentration of power for organized unions. Given that the long term health of a society’s economy depends on the balance of power of workers and theirs employers, should the governments be ethically obliged to interfere and protect, preserve, or promote worker rights in the best interests of the public?

The government’s critical and necessary supports of worker rights in the 1930s had helped shift the overwhelming corporate power back to the workers, resulting in a momentary balance of power between the two entities. However, the unregulated shift of power from businesses to organized unions produced an unhealthy concentration of power in favor of organized unions, which resulted in negative social and economic consequences to the country. To reverse the process, the government took prejudice actions against organized unions in the next few decades, resulting in a slow but inevitable shift of power from organized unions back to the hands of corporate America. This unregulated shift of power from the once victims, organized unions, back to the perpetrator, businesses; brings the issue back to the start. Today, the government is once again faced with the challenge of an uneven distribution of power between businesses and organized unions where power is highly concentrated for businesses over organized unions. How should the government proceed to prevent history from repeating itself? Ultimately, the complexities of debate go beyond the yes and no questions. 

        There are no rights or wrongs to the current organized unions’ crisis but progresses are made through objective and just communication and efforts by all parties involved. History tends to repeat itself if lessons taught are not learned. Businesses, organized unions, and the government need to come to a realization that a concentration of power in a single entity trend to erode the health of the surrounding life, the people. To what extent can the means justify the ends or vice versa? What are the implications of each individual’s actions on the future of the business, the government and eventually the people? Instead of unfairly treating each other like an enemy, businesses, organized unions, and the government need to get past the complexities and objectively look at the broader but simple issues at hand: the disappearance of a balance of power will be more costly than beneficial to every party.

      The government must look for solutions beyond that of common sense. The question should not only be, how can I stabilize the power dynamitic in the market place, but incorporate the question, how can I maintain the balance after the stabilization? Unless further researches or approaches are explored, we will continue to travel a path that will lead to a full circle. It might be easier to shift the responsibilities from one party to another or meet the society’s expectations without really exceeding them, but are they the right approaches to take. The burdens businesses, organized unions and the government carries with them should not be taken lightly. Each individual person has the opportunities to break this cycle and provide a better future for later generations, but the first step we must take is to leave our selfish desires behind. We have to believe that unity rather than separation will be more beneficial to every party and for future generations.