> Basically the real conclusion should be that strikes only work if there is also some additional force preventing outside people from filling the void left by the striking workers.
When talking about labor and unions, this is essentially a tautology because the power of unions is the power of collective bargaining.
Collective bargaining cannot obtain unless all human capital (laborers) is deployed through the union. Human capital that is outside the union fractures the power of the union and destroys the power of collective bargaining.
In vulgar terms, human capital outside the union is referred to as "scabs" that temporarily heal the wounds produced by a labor dispute.
In theory maybe but in practice most countries have laws that protect unions on the books. Union force is not simply the force of collective bargaining.
The first unions existed before there were laws to protect them. Eg, the bootmakers of the Boston Journeymen Bootmaker's Society used collective action in the early 1800s, even before their right to do so was explicitly decided in Commonwealth v. Hunt (1842).
Yes, there are laws to protect unions. You cannot look at that in isolation. There are also laws to prevent some types of collective bargaining. Think of it more as a negotiated arrangements - unions agreed to avoid some behaviors in exchange for certain legal rights.
For example, in a free market, a union should be able to use its collective bargaining power to negotiate a closed shop arrangement with an employer. This is illegal in the US. In the same free market, employers can agree to blacklist people because of their union membership. This is also illegal in the US.
We could remove all laws which would protect unions, leaving them hobbled by all the laws which prevent them from fully exercising collective bargaining. But pressure builds up, as you can see by the (successful) wildcat strike this year by teachers in West Virginia.
When talking about labor and unions, this is essentially a tautology because the power of unions is the power of collective bargaining.
Collective bargaining cannot obtain unless all human capital (laborers) is deployed through the union. Human capital that is outside the union fractures the power of the union and destroys the power of collective bargaining.
In vulgar terms, human capital outside the union is referred to as "scabs" that temporarily heal the wounds produced by a labor dispute.
EDIT: readability, grammar