The Success of the Use of Coercion by the Government - Assignment Example

Law Assignment Answers to the short-answer questions Response to question one The legal regime that was charged with regulation of industrial conflicts in the 20th century was not very effective. The system did not seem to care for the problems that were affecting all the workers and laborers. The system seemed to favor the British merchants and workers, who were often brutal and unfair to their servants. In most cases, these business people would pay peanuts to their employees and casual laborers, who had to enjoy hard labour in farms and mines. In most instances, the legal regime failed in several instances to strike an effective balance between the workers demands and the wishes of their employers. This led to a lot of strikes and riots against businesses ad farm managers, with some of them being killed by irate mobs of laborers Response to question two Following the failure of the business owners and farm workers to agree on effective methods and conditions of work, the federal government decided to have a direct intervention in these disputes so as to bring lasting solutions. The federal government knew that by creating a peaceful and effective environment for work, it would benefit from taxes that it would charge the businesses, farms and the workers. In this regard, the government wanted to create an effective workforce that would cause a lot of economic growth and development. Additionally, the government took the role of the mediator because it wanted to safeguard and consolidate on its investments, which would give it financial resources that it could use in increasing its stability against invasions from other governments. Response to question three During the twentieth century, there were several disputes that kept on emerging among the public and private business institutions. Many of the private employers complained of harassment from public institutions, most of which engaged in unfair competition practices, thus hurting the businesses operated by private entities. This continued disputes necessitated the need for federal government’s intervention to solve these disputes and create an enabling environment for economic growth and development. The federal government knew that solving these disputes, it would have a proper system by which it would collect taxes, which it could use to enhance its processes and functions Response to question four The disputes that characterized the economic environment during the 20th C needed a bipartisan arbitrator, who could not favor any of the sides that were conflicting. It was necessary that the arbitrator examines the interests of both parties before deciding on the most effective approaches of solving the emerging disputes. The federal industrial systems for solving disputes that had been put in place to listen to and offer effective solutions for the disputes did not live to their expectations. Most of these institutions ended up favoring employers because most of them would have an upper voice against the workers. Response to question five The development of railway companies was an important step that would open up the interior parts of the countryside, something that would lead to creation of more markets for the companies that had dominated most towns. The success of these companies required a lot of labour, which was necessary for the labour-intensive endeavor. However, the demand for this labour by these companies placed them on a collision by the government, which was careful to avoid exploitation of the populace by these companies. The federal government wanted a system in which the companies would engage the people in formal employment contracts with proper wages that would compensate for their commitment to work. Response to question six Finally, the railway companies managed to get cheap labour from the people, who were motivated to work because of the poverty that they were facing. However, just as earlier anticipated, the conditions of work in these companies were almost unbearable. Most of the managers would treat the workers like slaves, giving them hard labour against meager pay, which prompted a wide unrest amongst the workers. This made them to unite against their employers so that they could fight for an improvement of their pay and better working conditions. After violence broke between the employees and their employees, the blame would often be put on the workers because they did not have a voice in solving their conflicts. Their employers would bribe their way, that making it hard for them to get any justice. Response to question seven Inasmuch as the government seemed to be against the railway companies in their quest for using the locals in their construction, their work was very critical to the government’s objectives of national development. This drive pushed the government to reduce their commitment towards listening to the workers complaints whenever they raised them. The government can therefore be said to have played a key role in suppressing the rights of the workers by failing to be impartial arbiters in bringing reliable and lasting solutions to the disputes that often kept arising. Additionally, any efforts that the government put in listening to these disputes ended up being bias in favor of the railway companies. Response to question eight During the Second Industrial Revolution, there was need to have a difference in the way workers were managed by companies. There was a need for an improvement in the way disputes that often characterize various companies and industries were to be emerged. All these and many other issues led to the rise of a more responsible system that took care of the welfare of workers. These developments saw the emergence of the craft unionism, which was responsible for looking after the welfare of different kinds of crafts. These crafts often represented the workers in meetings with employers, laying proper conditions of work and solving complaints that emerged. They were also formed to agitate for prompt payments, which were commensurate to the hard labour that they did in the companies and businesses. Response to question nine Sometimes whenever, there was an increase in workers unrest over employment issues. The legal systems and the government were often forced to use coercive methods in calming down these unrests. This coercion was sometimes aimed at forcing the employees to take what was on offer from these companies. These coercion from the government sometimes involved jailing and sentencing people that championed for the rights of employees. During these times, there was almost less or no action done against the employers because the government has vested interests in their activities, which seemed to advance their goals of national development. Response to question ten The government seemed t be against the rights of unionism as well as freedom of speech. This was prompted by the observation that most of the leaders of these unions were highly influential people, whose speech would cause wide unrests among the workers that needed such bold and confident leaders to champion for their rights. Therefore, the government, through its legal institutions tried to suppress this right by sentencing some of these leaders to long term sentences and other harsh penalties. These actions were thought to be effective in causing fear among the unionists. Additionally, the government would sometimes bribe these leaders so that they do not agitate for the rights of their members. Mini Essay The response of the state in solving disputes between employers and employees Managing the welfare of workers is one of the important functions of the government through its different agencies and departments. The government’s main function is to create a conducive in which people can comfortably take part in social and economic activities for the individual welfare and the government in general. This function started centuries ago, with many changes having been witnessed in the same function to the present times. One of the characteristics of states’ response to ensuring proper functioning of the economic system involved a lot of coercion. During this time, there were ineffective approaches towards managing many of the disputes that kept emerging in different industries (Fudge 2010). This essay examines some of the motivations toward the use of coercion by the government in solving disputes and other issues that emerged in different industries. The use of coercion According to Fudge (2010), some of the industries like construction were characterized by a lot of unrest from employees, most of whom complained of being given hard labour against meager wages and tough working conditions. Most of the employers in the construction industries needed a lot of work to be done, but their remuneration was very poor. On the other hand, the construction industry was very essential to the government, which wanted to achieve economic growth and development with such infrastructure. In this regard, the government’s, involvement in solving these disputes did not bear much fruits since the government itself was by-partisan, favoring the employers than employees. The government decided to use its legal systems to suppress the rights of freedom of speech from the workers’ union leaders, most of whom were highly vocal in championing for the rights of their members, who in this case, were workers (Fudge 2010). The use of coercion by the government was aimed at reducing the pressure from these unions to the employers. In doing these, the workers would continue to be suppressed by their workers and thus the government continued to advance its goals and objectives. Conclusion In conclusion, it is important to realise that the success of the use of coercion by the government led to development of infrastructure that later opened up countries for businesses and other economic activities. However, this was achieved at the expense of many union leaders, most of whom were killed with other sentenced to long sentences with harsh treatment. However, the spirit of unionism among workers did not die; advancements on the same have seen an improvement in human rights activitism and the union movement, which has led to many reforms in industries (Fudge 2010), bringing many freedoms that workers in contemporary times seem to enjoy. References Fudge, J. (2010). Work on trial: Canadian labour law struggles. Toronto: Irwin Law for the Osgoode Society for Canadian Legal History. Read More