From a social action theoretical perspective an individual, company or any interest group has the privilege of organizing a campaign. Political parties are stirred into campaigning when there are elections. Likewise employers; employees and unions have that same constitutional right to advance their cause within the parameters of social justice. Should there be limits? The writer would say ‘no’ and at the same time ‘yes ‘since an issue of this magnitude must be reviewed from the paradigm of objectivity. Employers or employees who are represented by a union have to allow the union’s legitimacy to function as it pertains to the rule of law.
As such when it comes to conducting campaigns the union, employer or employee must operate within the specific jurisdiction which confines the boundaries or scope of its action. For this model it can be posited that limits should be imposed so that the rule of law could prevail. Many times due an intense industrial climate campaign participants can become nasty in the process of projecting a cause. If there are no limits the issue at hand can be propelled out of proportion as is be observed in numerous campaigns.
Slanderous statements are fired like piecing bullets to members of an opposing point of view. There must be moral boundaries within which legitimate social action must be taken A classic example of when limits are necessary is where a group of employers or employees are advised by their union to stage a lock out strike. With this type of industrial action once the employee is a union member he/she is expected to either remain at home or show up at the work place to lock the gates preventing any employee or employer from entering the premises.
This is an acute industrial action against management or company officials. Every Union member may not totally agree with the criteria for action and would still want to show up for work. Also theses individuals, perhaps, cannot afford the lost of income which the action entails. There must be a limit then as to what the union representatives can do during its campaigned industrial action against workers who did not support the lock out strike. Precisely these individuals ought to be protected by limits
Alternatively, it can be advanced where a peaceful work to rule industrial action is taken and the situation is far less tense there would be no need for limits. No one is threatened by loss of income neither violent reactions of union members as well as officials. It is more a consensus than conflict. Management cannot penalize a worker for completing only the tasks written on o their list of duties. It may only cost them an increase in pay the following year. Conclusively, do you think that there should be any limits on employer and union campaigning? ‘Yes ‘and ‘no’ from a perspective of objectivity.
It mainly depends on the situation at hand and how far the campaign for justice takes the participants. Once the issue is sensitive enough; has the potential to get out of proportion ‘yes. ’ If it is just subtle disobedience in fallacy of obedience then ‘no. ’ REFERENCES Complete Campaigns. A campaign Guide. Retrieved May 22nd, 2010. http://www. completecampaigns. com/article. asp? articleid=103 The Burden of Proof(2000) A Panel of Law Students Look at issues facing Campaign 2000. Retreived 22nd May 2010. http://edition. cnn. com/TRANSCRIPTS/0010/17/bp. 00. html