1-1 in the sense that there's 1 company and me. Not 1 company and all of the employees, that somehow have to agree, or accept what previous employees decided or whatever. On my end of the contract, I want only me.

> To pick up the OP original question, why do you have an issue for with your employment being a 1 to many, but not the dealings after a car accident?

I didn't give my opinion on my preferences on car accidents, of which I've had a few so you're just assuming I don't have a problem with that either. I don't see what car accidents have to do with employment contracts, and the parents point was about insurance and it was a terrible parallel. People are free to chose whichever insurance company they want and do not have to negotiate terms based on what others want, I can call them up and ask for a discount or shop around until I get one, regardless of what other customers pay, the same way I can negotiate my salary when there's no unions around.

> 1-1 in the sense that there's 1 company and me. Not 1 company and all of the employees, that somehow have to agree, or accept what previous employees decided or whatever. On my end of the contract, I want only me.

That is a pretty arbitrary distinction. If you argue that it's 1 company, you might as well argue that it's 1 union, so that is a 1-1 relationship as well.

Sorry I don't want to be dismissive, but I'm really trying to understand your argument and to me saying you want 1-1 instead of 1-many is simply restating you don't want a union. There is no reasoning that I can understand.

>> To pick up the OP original question, why do you have an issue for with your employment being a 1 to many, but not the dealings after a car accident?

>I didn't give my opinion on my preferences on car accidents, of which I've had a few so you're just assuming I don't have a problem with that either. I don't see what car accidents have to do with employment contracts, and the parents point was about insurance and it was a terrible parallel. People are free to chose whichever insurance company they want and do not have to negotiate terms based on what others want, I can call them up and ask for a discount or shop around until I get one, regardless of what other customers pay, the same way I can negotiate my salary when there's no unions around.

I somewhat agree that the insurance example is not the greatest analogy (none typically are great), but from the rest you write I understand that you feel that if there is a union you can not negotiate pay? Most of the places I'm aware of still let you negotiate pay even if there are unions. Another question, is this a matter of principle, or do you believe you can negotiate a better deal than the union? If so why?

I don't care about a better deal, I care about being personally responsible for the outcome of my life. I put way more value in being responsible for my own outcome, even if it'd be worse, than to have someone else do it for me or to feel like I'm part of a package deal with others. You don't have to feel the same way, but the same I way I support other's rights to unionise I think you should allow for people that have a different value system than yours.