Strikes poll results!


Recently, workers from various industries have chosen to strike and the news has been full of stories about how communities, and sometimes whole countries, have been disrupted.

This gave us an idea for this week’s poll!

For this poll we asked you to share how you felt about the following statement:

Should everybody be allowed to go on strike?

Here's what you thought:


Comments (147)

You must be logged in with Student Hub access to post a comment. Sign up now!

  • Everyone should be allowed to strike so that their terms and conditions can be met.

    1. Can you think of the impact if lots of different types of workers all went on strike at once?

      1. In order to prevent a scenario like that, employers should play their part by meeting their employees needs before it gets to the point on strike.

        1. I agree because if this is done everything will be ok and the economy will grow as people agree on things.

        2. I agree because... if employers did thatthen there wouldn't be strikes

      2. If that happens, then the government must have failed in its responsibilities. In my country, the strike is the only language that the government understand.

      3. It will be a real problem when different important workers go on strike. People have the right to go on strike but they should also think about other people and their families.
        In my city, Kaduna there was a strike in May 2021 that involves all workers, the electricity workers turned off the lights, the tanker drivers did not supply fuel, the workers in the water resources company stoped the supply of water and the train service was halted everything was down for 5days. People had no electricity no water and no fuel to fuel their generators. The strike was suspended on 19th May when the federal government summoned both parties for a discussion.
        So it will be a real problem every different workers go on strike at the same time.

      4. The picture is not complete except with everyone working in his area to complete the picture. The society needs all jobs without exception. However, there are daily emergency jobs that we cannot do without, such as the doctor who is needed by patients, and then the teachers who have a role in raising advanced and advanced generations, and the cleaners who reduce the carbon footprint, because without them, pollution and chaos will prevail. And let's not forget the engineer, the blacksmith, and the carpenter. All of these professions are not complete unless they are present together at the same time.

      5. In all seriousness if all workers went on strike at once we have a purge like world , no hospitals no guardi no shop keepers no security simply war in the streets. To prevent this we need to listen to workers problems before they strike which they have every right to do they do a fare days work and there fore deserve a fair days pay they deserve workable conditions and proper treatment from their superiors , workers deserve fair treatment over all ,they don’t just strike for no reason so the only person who can prevent strike is the people who put them in these situations in the first place.

      6. If the workers strike at one time, there is no one to work, so their demands must be fulfilled so that they do not strike
        Cessation of work may be the result of conducting a referendum among the workers to decide on declaring this cessation.

      7. I do not agree with you, because if workers or teachers strike, there is no one to teach students, and if students learn, it becomes a development in society, so they must be in agreement because this negatively affects students. ❤️

      8. If lots of different types of workers went on strike at once, it would indeed have a significant impact. Strikes have the potential to disrupt various sectors and industries, affecting the economy, public services, and the overall functioning of society.

        When multiple groups of workers go on strike simultaneously, it can amplify the collective voice and draw attention to their demands. It creates a sense of unity and solidarity among different sectors, increasing the visibility and impact of their grievances.

        However, the impact of such widespread strikes can be complex and multifaceted. On one hand, it can exert substantial pressure on employers and policymakers to address the concerns and meet the terms and conditions of the workers. It can lead to negotiations, compromises, and ultimately positive changes in working conditions, wages, and other relevant aspects.

        On the other hand, simultaneous strikes across various sectors can also cause significant disruptions and inconveniences for the general public. Essential services such as healthcare, transportation, and education may be affected, leading to potential hardships and consequences for individuals who rely on these services.

        It is important to strike a balance between exercising the right to strike and considering the broader impact on society. While strikes can be an effective tool for advocating for workers' rights and negotiating better conditions, careful planning, dialogue, and communication are necessary to minimize the negative consequences for the general public.

        Ultimately, the decision to allow or engage in strikes should be guided by the specific circumstances, the legitimacy of the demands, and the overall well-being of both workers and society as a whole. Open channels of communication and collective bargaining can often provide constructive alternatives to strikes, promoting dialogue and finding mutually beneficial solutions.

    2. If all demands were met for every strike that occurred, what impacts do you think this would have (positive or negative)?

      1. It will have a positive impact because there are strikes that lead to people getting hurt so if the employer meets their employees conditions, it will not result to strike whereas people getting hurt.

        1. This is very true but can only be achieved if employers stop being corrupt,there are very many employers out there who don't value the efforts of their employees they all need to style up.

          1. How do you think employers can show that they value employees?

            1. Yes, employers must appreciate the workers so that they accept the work while they are satisfied and for it to be a profitable business with a satisfied soul. 1- Praising them and thanking them for their work and always motivating them. 2- Granting them leave on special occasions and others. 3- Granting them financial rewards and increasing their salaries.
              4- Acting modestly and not showing off in front of them. 5- Resolve differences in a positive way. And many ways all this will lead to evolution. social

            2. Respecting them and providing them with safety, unlike what happens to us, not tiring them, but rather giving them breaks, reducing the number of hours, and giving them a bigger salary, but not in an exaggerated amount. For example, a construction worker wants to take a doctor’s money. This is not permissible. If that happens, the employer can report him or expel him.

            3. Employees, who feel valued at work are happier and less likely to look for other opportunities. Keeping employees valued can create a better atmosphere. There are many ways to show employees how employer values them. For example, listening and taking actions on employee feedback. Knowing the importance of valued employees, it creates a strong company. Thanks to for giving some informations about valuing employees.
              The employees are valued by:
              1. Having a positive attitude and respect towards employees make them feel safe and secured.
              2. Celebrating achievements can keep teams and employees engaged.
              3. Employers spending time with employees can establish connection between them.
              4. One of the best way to show employees that you appreciate them is to offering them bonuses.
              5. Sometimes in the workplace, people begin to lose tracks of how their work impact other. Here, personal responsibility plays a role.
              Importance of valuing employees:
              1. Building trust between employer and employees like value their input and feedback.
              2. If employees work are appreciated and valued, they will continue to work hard and it will increase productivity.
              3. When employer takes time to know employees, they contribute and show their values this will increase their morality, team department and company morality increases.

            4. How I think employers can show that they value employees:
              1. Use simple gestures:
              Small, simple gestures can be a powerful way to show your employees you value them. Consider handwritten notes of appreciation, emails expressing your gratitude or personal phone calls of encouragement. These efforts take little time and effort to complete but can have a big impact on your employee's perception of your appreciation. When you notice an employee exceeding expectations, completing tasks outside of their usual responsibilities or needing a bit of encouragement, small gestures that express how much you value them can help employees feel acknowledged and appreciated.
              2. Create new opportunities:
              Providing opportunities for your employees to develop skills, advance their careers and accept new responsibilities can be a great way to express your belief in their abilities. When employees feel you believe in their ability to succeed, they may more clearly understand the value they bring to your organization. Consider promotions, opportunities to complete projects and asking for your employees' input to provide opportunities for them to succeed and feel valued.
              3. Be specific and personal:
              In order to most effectively express your appreciation and value of your employees, it may be beneficial to be as specific and personal as possible. To do this, instead of offering generalized comments of praise, do your best to include specific details about your employees' accomplishments. For example, instead of simply saying, "Good job," you could say something more specific, like "Thank you for contributing to the meeting today, your insights were really helpful and I'm glad you had the courage to speak up."
              4. Build trust:
              Building trust is an essential part of maintaining positive relationships with your employees. Employees who feel you trust them may understand the value of their skills, expertise and contributions to the organization. To show your trust, try not to micromanage or provide too much input for tasks you're sure they can complete independently. Providing your employees with some autonomy can help them feel you trust and value their ability to successfully complete their tasks.
              5. Consider internal improvements:
              Ensuring your team has the resources they need to succeed can show you value their time and effort. If there are any internal improvements you can make to contribute to your employees' success, consider implementing these changes. This could include updating software, purchasing new office furniture or supplies, ensuring up-to-date technology.
              6. Make time to connect:
              Making time to connect with your employees is another great way to show how much you value them. Consider organizing company events and activities, like trivia nights or office parties. These types of occasions not only offer an opportunity to get to know your employees on a personal level but can also act as an opportunity for your employees to relax and feel rewarded for their work. Special occasions for connecting with your employees could also include holiday parties, themed parties and company outings.
              7. Incorporate mentorship:
              Incorporating a mentorship system for new employees can help you communicate the value of even the newest additions to your team. Consider creating a mentorship or buddy policy to pair new employees with experienced members of the staff. Not only does this help the new employees feel valued and welcomed onto the team, but the experienced employees may appreciate being recognized for their experience and your trust in their ability to successfully onboard new team members.
              8. Offer ownership:
              A powerful way to motivate your employees while showing them you value their efforts is by offering chances to take ownership of important projects and tasks. To do this, reflect on your team members' unique skills, talents and areas of expertise. Then, try to match them with projects or important tasks that are best suited to their skill sets. Offering them ownership of these types of responsibilities shows you trust and value their abilities.
              9. Be honest:
              Being honest when communicating with your team can help them feel valued by building trust and aligning efforts for improvement. Truthful and transparent feedback can help your team feel you genuinely care about their success and professional development. Whenever possible, be honest about your employees' performances, discuss ways to improve and provide them with the guidance and resources they need to develop their skills.
              10. Communicate clearly and often:
              Communicating clearly and often can help your employees feel informed about the status of the organization and empowered to make thoughtful decisions about their roles. Consider sending regular organization updates to keep your employees informed about important company events. To do this, you can hold regular company-wide meetings or send out a monthly newsletter that outlines important events and upcoming changes.
              11. Reward results:
              Rewarding results can be one of the most straightforward ways to show your employees you value them. There are several ways you can reward achievements or exceptional efforts, such as:
              1.Thank you notes
              2.Gift cards
              3.Additional days off
              4.Public praise
              6.An employee of the month award
              12. Emphasize well-being:
              It's important to encourage employees to prioritize their well-being. Employees who feel healthy and emotionally well are more likely to succeed, be productive and contribute to the success of the organization. To emphasize the importance of well-being, you can implement generous break periods, allow penalty-free leaves of absence for mental health reasons, provide resources that highlight ways to achieve a healthy work-life balance and provide plenty of water and snacks in the office. Placing value on the health and wellness needs.

              Above are the ways I think employers can show that they value employees.

            5. Employers can demonstrate that they value their employees in several ways:

              1. Fair and Competitive Compensation: Employers should ensure that employees are paid fair wages that are commensurate with their skills, experience, and responsibilities. Offering competitive compensation packages and regular performance-based raises or bonuses can show employees that their efforts are recognized and appreciated.

              2. Respect and Recognition: Employers should foster a culture of respect and recognition in the workplace. This includes acknowledging employees' contributions, providing regular feedback, and recognizing their achievements and milestones. Simple gestures like saying "thank you" and showing appreciation for a job well done can go a long way in making employees feel valued.

              3. Opportunities for Growth and Development: Employers can demonstrate their commitment to employees' professional growth by providing opportunities for learning, training, and advancement. This can include offering workshops, mentorship programs, tuition reimbursement, or career development plans. Investing in employees' development not only benefits them individually but also contributes to the overall success of the organization.

              4. Work-Life Balance: Employers can support employees' well-being by promoting a healthy work-life balance. This can be achieved through flexible work arrangements, paid time off, family-friendly policies, and promoting a supportive and inclusive work environment. Valuing employees' personal lives and creating a positive work atmosphere can enhance their job satisfaction and loyalty.

              5. Employee Involvement and Empowerment: Employers should involve employees in decision-making processes and provide opportunities for them to contribute their ideas and opinions. Actively seeking employee input and involving them in shaping company policies and practices can make them feel valued and empowered.

              6. Transparent Communication: Employers should establish open and transparent communication channels with their employees. This includes keeping employees informed about company updates, changes, and decisions that may affect them. Regularly communicating organizational goals, objectives, and performance can help employees understand their role in the bigger picture and feel connected to the company's mission.

              By implementing these practices, employers can demonstrate that they genuinely value their employees' efforts and contributions, fostering a positive and productive work environment.

        2. I disagree with you. Do you think that injuring people can benefit the workers? It is true that the employer will fulfill their requests after seeing the losses, but this will cause people to be injured, and with the repetition of that matter, the number of state personnel will decrease significantly and noticeably.

        3. I agree because... Setting appropriate conditions and adhering to them will lead to impressive results such as non-strike and people not being affected or losing anything else

        4. I disagree because first of all the employer can't see every employee's need but the employer can approve another employee to take care of the other employees. And secondly in strikes the common people should not get any hurt if the strikers do so they will be getting the punishment accordingly in the court.
          THANK YOU.

        5. I disagree because... The aim of a strike is to convince the employer to meet the demands of the workers, not to hurt innocent people. strikes are naturally supposed to be peaceful because the workers just decide not to work. But if strikes become violent, the government may decide to ban them to avoid the violence it brings. Strikes are just supposed to convince the employer that they are at a loss if they don't meet their demands and not to cause trouble which could lead to the death of people.

          1. If a strike becomes violent, is it still a strike? Or should it then be classed as something else, for example, a riot?

            1. Well yes I think it should be classified as a riot. A strike is a type of protest but it is peaceful most of the time. The aim isn't to hurt anyone but to achieve better working conditions. If the number of violent strikes should increase, workers may lose it as a right and they would have to either suffer in silence or take drastic measures.

            2. YES, it should be classified as a strike if there is an understandable reason for example workers of the government have not been paid for three consecutive months and still the government is doing nothing ,for the government to be alerted and alarmed a riot strike must be organized because their rights are not being fulfilled.

            3. You make a valid point. Strikes are intended to be peaceful actions where workers withhold their labor to pressure employers to meet their demands. When a strike turns violent and results in harm to people or property, it can no longer be considered a peaceful strike but may be classified as something else, such as a riot or violent protest.

              The distinction between a strike and a riot is important because strikes are generally protected as a fundamental right in many democratic societies. They serve as a means for workers to collectively express their grievances and negotiate better working conditions, wages, or other demands. Riots, on the other hand, involve violence, destruction, and pose a threat to public safety.

              When a strike becomes violent, it not only deviates from its original purpose but also undermines the credibility and effectiveness of the workers' cause. Violence can distract from the core issues, alienate public support, and lead to negative consequences for both the striking workers and the general public.

              Furthermore, governments and authorities may be prompted to intervene if a strike turns violent in order to maintain law and order. This could result in restrictions, bans, or other measures that limit the right to strike altogether, which can be detrimental to the workers' ability to advocate for their rights.

              It is crucial for workers and organizers to promote non-violence and maintain peaceful means of expressing their demands during strikes. Peaceful strikes are more likely to garner public support, encourage dialogue and negotiation, and achieve meaningful outcomes without jeopardizing the safety and well-being of others.

              strikes are intended to be peaceful actions that aim to bring attention to workers' demands. When a strike becomes violent, it deviates from its original purpose and may be considered a different type of action, such as a riot. By maintaining non-violent means of expression, workers can uphold the integrity and effectiveness of their cause while preserving the right to strike as an essential tool for collective bargaining.

      2. It has a positive effect. If the striker takes his right or his demands, he will perform his work to the fullest, and he will be sincere in the institution in which he works, and he will have a positive impact on the success of the institution.

        1. I respect your opinion, but what about the negative effects, such as deaths, injuries, or even the demolition of buildings that are being built, and many others, all of which are behind the implementation of the strike?

      3. Personally, I think that this would have a mix of both. It really depends on the Employee's character. Some Employees may take advantage of this, and start striking over the tiniest of problems purely because they know that no matter what, their cause for striking will be improved upon, and they can get whatever they want. However, this could also have a positive impact because we would need less strikes for people to get better pay and working conditions.

        To sum my point up, whether it would have a positive or negative impact is based on the Employee. There is no way to know for sure if all demands being met would be a good thing or a bad thing.

      4. Not all strikes are reasonable, some lack a proper driving force or motive. We all know pressure groups are an organized group of people that have similar occupations, now the main function of this group is to try as much as possible to influence government policies for the benefit of their members regardless the cost. This simply means that these people can declare strikes inorder to increase thier pay even if it comes at the cost of another groups salary now get me right, they are receiving a reasonable amount but they desire more at the cost of another group's salary, surely that can't happen. The government have prepared a budget and so therefore, they can't distort their budget for a groups selfish desire it sure can't work.
        If such a strikes demands are met, it will give a negative impact because the citizens will use strikes as a means of manipulating and exploiting the system instead of a means of enhancing justice also, if such a strikes demands are met it will distort the country's budget.

      5. Hi, Olivia @ KPMG,
        If all demands were met for every strike that occurred, it would have both positive and negative impacts.

        Positive impacts would be:

        Improved working conditions: Meeting the demands of the workers or teachers on strike would lead to improved working conditions, such as better pay, benefits, and job security. This would enhance the overall well-being of the employees and potentially increase their motivation and dedication to their work.

        Increased job satisfaction: Addressing the demands of the workers would contribute to higher job satisfaction levels. Satisfied workers are more likely to perform better and be more productive, which can positively impact the quality of education provided to students.

        Enhanced social justice: Meeting the demands of the workers would promote social justice and fairness, ensuring that their rights and needs are recognized and met. This can have a positive societal impact, fostering a more equitable and inclusive environment.
        Negative impacts would be:

        Disruption of education: Strikes can lead to a disruption in the regular functioning of educational institutions. If demands are met for every strike, frequent disruptions in the form of strikes could hinder the continuity of education, negatively affecting students' learning outcomes and progress.

        Financial strain: Meeting the demands of every strike could impose a significant financial burden on the institutions or organizations responsible for providing education. This may result in budget cuts for other important areas, potentially compromising the quality of education in the long run.

        Loss of instructional time: Extended strikes can lead to a loss of instructional time, which is crucial for students' academic development. Students may fall behind in their curriculum, and it could be challenging to make up for the lost time and ensure they receive a comprehensive education.

        While meeting the demands of every strike can bring positive changes for workers and teachers, it is essential to find a balance that considers the overall well-being of both the educational workforce and the students. Striking a fair compromise that addresses concerns without causing significant disruptions to the education system is crucial for sustainable development in society.

    3. If the strike is permissible for everyone, then it is not possible to control matters in the state, because if each individual does not have his demands, then he must demand them before striking, and if he does not respond to them, they strike, and it is not necessary for all reasons to strike, so it is valid as a right for all, but when You ask this demand, if you are not answered then strike.

    4. The right to strike is a fundamental human right recognized by international law and many countries' constitutions. It allows workers to withhold their labor as a means of collective bargaining and negotiating better working conditions, wages, and benefits with their employers.

      However, while strikes can be an effective tool for workers to demand fair treatment and improved working conditions, they can also have negative consequences for both workers and employers. Strikes can disrupt business operations, damage relationships between employers and employees, and have negative economic impacts.

      As such, it's important to strike a balance between the right to strike and the need to maintain productivity and economic stability. This can be achieved through fair labor laws that provide for the right to strike while also setting reasonable limits on its use.

      In conclusion, while the right to strike is an important tool for workers to demand better conditions, it should be exercised responsibly and in a way that doesn't harm the economy or the interests of other parties involved.

    5. I disagree because... if some workers go on strike for example police, doctors, nurses, etc. It would be bad for the people who need help them. Imagine if there's a burglary or shooting at a place there will be no one to go and stop it because the polices are on strike, and if a person has been seriously injured and is on the verge of death, he or she cannot be saved due to the strike of the doctors and nurses. Therefore not everyone should be allowed to strike, if they want their terms and conditions to be met they can protest about it instead of stopping their work.

    6. I reject that. Can you think of the negative effects of it? Well, I will give you some of these effects. Causing deaths, injuries, not treating people with chronic diseases, causing thefts and lack of security, not completing studies and not completing houses whose construction has not been completed. You say that it has only positives, and this I add For some negatives, see your point of view

    7. I think everyone should be able to strike because it will in the long run benefit everyone. I think that if people are going to strike if they get to terms that they agree to, they will want to do better work and overall have a better reason to work, producing better work.

  • I think that everyone should be allowed to strike but the strike should be regulated by the workers because it still has a big impact on the masses. This is because services that are meant to be provided are not as the workers are on the strike action.

    1. Which group of workers might have the biggest impact in this way if they choose to strike? Which service is affected?

      1. Doctors, the police and the teacher are the most harmful categories of work. If a strike is taken, doctors and the affected service can cause deaths, the police, if they strike, security is absent, and the teacher, if they strike, may lead to ignorance. Construction workers, if they go on strike, may cause construction not to be enabled. There are houses when It should not be delayed in building it, and many other such works

      2. In my opinion i think health workers, teachers, police, firefighters,military personnel and airport staff will have the biggest impact on the society if they choose to strike. If health workers are on strike, the people will have no one to attend to them when they are sick or injured thereby leading to the loss of lives. If the police and military personnels go on strike, crime rate will no doubt increase which will also lead to the loss of lives and property. If firefighters go on strike it will also lead to loss of lives and property. If teachers go on strike, the money of parents will be wasted and the learning process of students will have to come to a halt. If airport staff go on strike, people won't be able to reach their intended destinations therefore causing a lot of problems. Due to this, countries like Japan has prohibited particular groups of workers from going on strike, although i do not support it because it should be their right.

      3. If a group of workers chooses to strike, the impact can vary depending on the industry and the specific services they provide. However, there are some sectors where strikes can have a significant impact on the masses. Some of them include:

        Transportation workers: Strikes by transportation workers, such as bus drivers, train operators, or airline staff, can have a substantial impact on the public. This can disrupt the daily commute of individuals, affect the movement of goods and services, and cause inconvenience for a large number of people who rely on public transportation.

        Healthcare workers: Strikes by healthcare professionals, including doctors, nurses, and support staff, can significantly impact the delivery of medical services. It can lead to the closure of hospitals or clinics, delay essential medical procedures, and affect patient care. The public's access to healthcare services may be compromised during such strikes.

        Education workers: Strikes by teachers and education support staff can disrupt the functioning of schools and educational institutions. It can result in the closure of schools, cancellation of classes, and interruptions in students' learning process. Parents may face challenges in arranging alternative childcare or educational support during these strikes.

        Public service workers: Strikes by public service workers, such as government employees in sectors like law enforcement, sanitation, or municipal services, can have a significant impact on the community. It can lead to disruptions in public safety, waste management, maintenance of public facilities, and other essential services that people rely on for their daily lives.

        Utility workers: Strikes by workers in the utility sector, including electricity, water, or gas providers, can cause inconvenience and disruption for the general public. It can result in power outages, water shortages, or heating and cooling issues, affecting individuals, businesses, and public facilities.

        It's important to note that the impact of strikes can vary depending on the specific context and the extent of participation by workers. The larger the scale and the longer the duration of the strike, the greater the impact is likely to be on the affected services and the general public.

    2. I agree with you but the employees can not set regulations on their own, the state has to come up with laws that will enable all masses to have positive strikes.

      1. Can you explain what you mean by a "positive strike", quick_lime?

        1. In response to your question, I think a positive strike is the refusal to work for a reasonable and acceptable reason. For example, a worker refuses to work because there is no availability of quality materials to care for its customers or patients

          1. It is positive but if doctors refuse to work, it will affect us so much. The death rates will be so high since there will be no one to treat people if they fall sick.And if teachers refuse to work, there will be high rates of illiteracy since there will be no one to teach students.So stopping to work affects so much. You would rather strike so that your issue is worked upon very fast.

            1. I agree that if doctors strike it will affect us so much. But would you rather still have them use faulty equipments on their customers or patients thereby endangering their lives and putting guilt and regret in the minds of the doctors. The same case applies to the teachers, if they lack the right resources to care and fend for themselves how do you think they would have the zeal to be hardworking and impact in the lives of the students. I suggest in order to solve strike, I think that essential professions should be allowed to strike but for a limited time and the government should be informed forehand before it is carried out.

          2. I agree because...
            This is true, not every strike is caused by the work manager, perhaps the company has a shortage of funds, so he may not receive his full salary, so a law must be drawn up regarding this thing and it must be stipulated that the strike must not be due to suffering financial conditions Including companies or workplaces, but rather because of a lack of a worker’s right, such as the work manager’s condoning the low salary of his worker.

            And one more thing, how is the strike? I believe that we have learned what the strike is, its causes and results resulting from it, so this topic has aroused my curiosity, and when I searched for it, this is what I concluded: Both the employer and the competent administrative authority must be notified at least ten days before the date specified for the strike. In all cases, the reasons for the strike and the date of its start and end must be known.
            It also concluded that workers are prohibited from calling or announcing a strike with the intention of amending a collective labor agreement during its validity period.

    3. Before the strike, they should try to raise their demands and claims to those responsible for them before the strike, in order to avoid its problems and the consequences of that, as the strike is a right for everyone, but they must be raised. Demands and problems, and if they are not resolved and compensated for this shortfall, they resort to striking

    4. I agree because... if every one is allowed to strike, people will be able to express their problems.But they should also have a limit to doing this.Strikes have a lot of effects so people who strike should have a clear reason why they are doing so.

    5. I agree with you in everything you said, but why don't we find another way to ensure the safety and satisfaction of everyone, a way to satisfy employers, workers and citizens?

  • I agree with the previous statement (Strikes should be allowed) because it"s a human right for every one ,and it's the most effective way to get rights that related to wages, improve the life level either for individuals, communities or countries.
    To be honest the whole strike has a disastrous impact on all,so what about the partly strike,after trying all ways to solve the issue???

    1. I think it's a big problem. But you mentioned that there are ways to solve this problem. Can you mention it please?

    2. A partial strike is the failure of employees to work more than the minimum required by the rules of their contract, which may cause a slowdown or decrease in production, because they are no longer working during their rest periods....
      I think that this strike is less severe than the total strike...and some countries allow this strike, so I don't think that this strike is very bad, but it reduces production....

  • In my opinion strikes should be allowed depending on the situation and who is going on strike as Strike is the refusal to work by a group of people or an organization and when people go on strike they always have a need that they are seeking to be addressed by their employer. People go on strike when they reach out to the government but to no avail so they forcefully demand it by going on strike. As I said earlier on, strikes should be Allowed but not to everyone because specific organizations like hospitals, banks, Schools etc… will have a big negative impact on the country when they go on strike.

    Like in my country Nigeria, after the lockdown there have been several strikes like the Academic staff union of universities (ASUU) went on strike for over 8 months in 2022,and before that they went on a 9 months strike in 2020 for better working conditions for academic staffs, increase funding of universities and improvements in the education system as a whole and it had a negative impact on the students of universities given that they couldn’t go to school and are forced to stay home for 17 months in total.

    Although I believe that strikes are good, there should be a limit on how long the go on strike and if that limit is exceeded the two parties should be forced into arbitration

    1. Welcome....
      Your opinion is very good, and I liked it, especially that "hospitals and schools cannot be bombed." I replied to active_black_bear to clarify what I said above/
      1- (It is not possible to strike in hospitals).. Certainly this is not possible because the hospital is not empty of patients, and if doctors suggest a strike, then this is the end, as the disease will spread throughout society. The spread of diseases among people, which leads to death.
      2- (In the event of a teacher's strike) the students will not be taught, and if the strike is prolonged, time will be lost. Those who were middle school students, a year later they were supposed to be in high school, but the strike disrupted their education, causing danger to the future of these students. ...
      Let the state do its best and provide the employees with all things so that the strike does not take place and the state's condition does not deteriorate
      thank you all

    2. Your opinion is beautiful and everyone respects it, but have you thought about the negative aspects of the strike? It is true that it is a right for all workers, but what will happen to the citizens and what is their fault in things they are not in? It is a problem between the employers and the workers. What is the fault of the citizens?

      1. welcome Dear I agree with you. If we look at the blow, we see that it is a double-edged sword that has its pros and cons. When employees go on strike, it affects our daily lives. The strike has been agreed upon, but we must feel for the employees. My father is a policeman and my mother is a teacher. They come back from work very tired. As children we are forbidden to talk to our parents, as a result of they are back from work, tired because they work long hours. My mother comes back from work tired and prepares food and cleans the house all this tiredness in exchange for low wages, and we in our region are facing the problem of high prices. Employers must meet the needs of employees so that strikes and conflicts do not occur.

        1. I feel your suffering, but there is a misunderstanding. I do not mean the employers. I mean the citizens. What is their fault in the strike? Why do we not see another, simpler way that does not harm any of the parties?

      2. Yes, I agree it is a problem between the employer and the workers and the citizens have no fault in it but that is exactly why workers go on strike so the public pressure will be on the employers and they have to give in to the workers demand. And also that is why I said that there should be a limit to haw long the workers go on strike and if the limit is exceeded the two parties should be forced to go for arbitration.

    3. I agree with you that it is an indispensable right, but what about its drawbacks when we do not find a way other than strikes

  • Telecommunication companies are companies that provides communications in the form of voice, data or signals through wires or optical cables. The main channel of communication in the world today is through this means. Almost all the activities that are happening in the world depends on internet connectivity and voice calls.
    I believe if the telecommunication company chose to go on strike, it will have the greatest impact in my country and the whole world.
    With the cashless policy in my country, banks won't be able to operate well and organizations and people won't be able to make transactions which will slow down most of the activities. Organizations won't be able to send and receive mails as well. Also exam bodies who conduct their exams online won't be able to have access to their portal which will affect the whole schedule of their examinations.
    lastly even this global conversation will not be able to hold without telecommunication. Thank you.

    1. Can you do some research and find an example of telecommunication workers striking? What happened?

      1. After my research, i found out that there was a telecommunication workers strike of New England telecom workers in the US. The main reason for the strike was for the workers to curtail work transfers among the three states were they had branches. The strike lasted for a long time. The company became bankrupt and workers became unemployed. They were able to survive from their savings and through fund raising. Both parties had a tough time but at a end of it all they reached came up with a better terms and conditions and workers resumed work. Here's the link if you wish to learn more

      2. One example of a telecommunications workers' strike occurred in August 2021 in Sri Lanka. The strike involved workers from the Sri Lanka Telecom (SLT) company, who were protesting against the government's plan to sell a 49% stake in the company to a foreign investor.

        The strike was organized by the All Ceylon Telecommunication Employees Union (ACTEU), which claimed that the privatization of SLT would result in job losses and reduced benefits for workers. The union also accused the government of not consulting with them before making the decision to sell the stake.

        During the strike, around 10,000 SLT workers stopped work, causing disruptions to the company's services across the country. The workers also staged protests in several cities, calling for the government to abandon the privatization plan.

        The strike lasted for four days before the union called it off, citing an agreement reached with the government to postpone the sale of the stake for six months and to engage in further discussions with the union.

        Overall, the SLT workers' strike was an example of labor unrest in the telecommunications sector, driven by concerns over job security and government policy.

    2. I agree because... we experienced a network down time from all the telecoms early this year. Making research for my assignment became difficult. I heard my teachers in school taking about how they couldn't have access to do their work. We had to stay for almost 4 hours without light because there was no network to buy electric unit for the meter my house. My parents were not able to transfer or withdraw money. With this experience i also believe if the telecom chose to go on strike we will have a great impact in my country.

  • I think everyone can strike because it is a human right that everyone should enjoy, but if they strike without any reason the government should punish them, but if the government doesn't give them their wage I think they should strike until the government give them their wage because they are working every moment for us

    1. Can you think of any negative impacts striking indefinitely, until wage demands are met, might have on the economy/general public or otherwise?

      1. Yes, the negative effects:if teachers strike for a long time, there will be a deterioration in the educational level of students and will be a failed generation also if doctors strike for a long time the percentage of diseases will increase, and people will hate each other

    2. I disagree because there is no strike without any reason. In the end, strike means protest, and there must be a reason for them to invoke the strike is not for one person, but for a group of people who believe that there is no justice and balance between the effort and the wages therefore, they resort to a strike, which is the only way to help them regain their rights  but if I strike a person for no reason, he can submit his resignation.

      1. Excellent point centered_radio. You draw attention to the fact that a strike is a collective action not an individual one.

      2. Do you think there might be an individual strike, and why??

        From my point of view, there may be an individual strike, but we will not call it a strike, rather we will call it opposition, because it is from one worker, but let us take this seriously, when the worker is bullied and that others distinguish him from him and that he works overtime without additional pay Here, the worker has the right to object in order to regain his rights.
        But on the other hand, this worker may be dismissed or expelled, because he is the only one who opposes his work and the laws by which he works, and this will make others silent about their rights that are taken away from them.

        So do you think that there should be an individual strike, and if your answer is yes, what are its negative and positive consequences??

      3. I agree because... Workers can't just go on strike without a reason, or go on strike without a logical reason. For example, if the workers in a company decide to go on strike until their employer pays them wages that is equivalent to that of a doctor's, that wouldn't really be a sensible reason to go on strike because they are demanding too much. Moreover, strikes are really important because they help workers express their demands. Workers like police, firefighters, doctors etc, have life threatening jobs and I think if any body should be given the right to strike, it should be them.

        1. Yes, your words are correct, so equality must be made between the two parties, and the demands are good and acceptable, and the worker does not demand a wage greater than his wage, and it is possible for him to demand wages that reach more work than his work. In that case, it is correct for the employer to refuse or reject the worker or inform the government instead

      4. I agree because... a person cannot go on strike without any reason, and if a person does go on strike without a reason a lot of people will think that that person is taking some days off from work without asking any permission, therefore the government will not take heed to the person. Moreover, I love your idea that the protest people make when they go on strike is to help them regain their rights, however, I have one question to ask you. What do you mean when you say if a person strikes for no reason he or she can submit their resignation?

    3. They rarely strike for no reason. In addition to the strike, it is not always about salaries. Governments must follow up on these matters and provide strike requirements before striking, because this results in a lot of negative things.

  • I think everyone should be allowed to strike because they have the right to protest if they have an issue with their working conditions. But for workers that are important to the betterment of the society such as doctors, teachers, police and fire fighters, their strikes should be limited and the officials should be informed beforehand about the strike to see if they can negotiate and meet the workers conditions to avoid the strike.

    1. I agree with you that everyone should be allowed to strike but stringent rules and regulations need to be put in place to safe guard the masses and destruction of property especially when these strikes get violent like in school for example in Makere university last year when students striked, some lost their lives and very many were injured plus many university facilities got damaged.

    2. And I agree with you on that, because everyone, not just doctors and teachers, must demand their rights, and if they are not fulfilled they resort to striking so that no crisis, problems and unrest occur in the state.

    3. I strongly agree with you because if these important workers go on strike without informing the officials there might be a lot of problems, moreover, I love your idea of workers informing officials beforehand of their strike so that this doesn't cause any absence of important workers.

  • In my my own opinion the national electric power authority ( NEPA ) will have the biggest impact in my country if they chose to go on strike.
    The NEPA are in control of all the electricity supply in my country. Once they go on strike there will be total outage of electricity which will decrease most of the productive activities in the country. Telecoms, hospitals, banks, individuals and other organizations will have to use other methods of electric supply in other to continue with their daily activities. As such this will increase the use of generators which will affect climate change because not all have the power to use solar panels as an alternative. I personally will have to use generator to charge my gadget in other to continue this conversation which will increase my personal carbon footprint.

    1. Do you still think the NEPA workers should be allowed to strike given the impact it will have on everyone else? Why/why not?

      1. NEPA could be allowed to strike if they need a better payment or better working conditions, because that is the only way they can be heard. But as for me i don't think they should be allowed to strike because once they on strike, they will be outage of electicity which will lead to different things like change in teaching style, sleeplessness, unscheduled tasks, uselessness of home appliances, inefficient learning and incompletion and delaying of tasks. NEPA in Nigeria carries almost every operation in Nigeria and if allowed to strike will have a very serious effect in the productive activities of the country. So as soon as the call for a strike, government should make quick adjustments and make sure their demand is meet.

      2. NEPA workers should not be allowed to go on strike because if NEPA should go on strike their will be a nation wide blackout as long as NEPA remains on strike. Last year NEPA went on one day strike which resulted in a nation wide blackout that caused the national grid to crash to zero megawatts throwing businesses and homes across the country into darkness which lead to a loss of 3 billion naira in a day. People started using generators as an alternative for the electricity plus the population in my country is over 200 million so one can imagine the amount of harmful gases that will be emitted in if every one were to use generators during the time NEPA was on strike.
        Rather there should be a proper negotiating channel to avoid them with proper working conditions to prevent this strike.

  • Striking is a legal human right which no one can prevent or deny . All principals should take care of their employees ' complaints to avoid strikes because any strike in any field will affects life negatively. So, government should help to make employees in every field to be protected and satisfied to avoid strikes. Do you agree with me?

    1. Yes, my dear.
      The government should be held responsible for any strike or civil disobedience. Because it's the government's role to do the right thing, preserve the financial and well-being of its people, and guarantee that they have got all their rights. If the government follows the rules it sets, there will never be something called strike but as you know there's no smoke without fire.

    2. I agree with you my friend, but there is a simple point I would like to share with you: Isn't the strike affecting the general public??. Although it is a legal right. Let's look at it from another side, not everything is in the hands of the manager, perhaps the company is suffering from financial problems. Therefore, I suggest that companies establish a constitution that stipulates the right of every worker.