Should we draw the line at malicious damage to property?
Or when innocent people trying to put food on their tables are injured, threatened and intimidated on their way to work?
What about when striking workers start to affect the entire country's economy? Should we perhaps draw the line there?
Isn't it possible that this system that protects workers' rights to strike is being abused?
Or could it be that the Unions behind these workers see instigating strikes as an easy way of growing its numbers and increasing the power it holds over business? In a country where labour unions are capable of bringing entire sectors of business to a halt, shouldn't we be looking at the legitimacy of THEIR reasons for initiating strike action?
And the question that really bugs me, the big one, is: What does the ability of workers to strike at the union's say so say about the sanctity of the contracts we agree upon with our workers?
I'm not saying workers should have their right to strike taken away - there are still legitimate reasons to strike - but perhaps we need stricter regulations for strikes so they don't spin out of control with such ease.
When striking workers endanger the lives of ordinary citizens, or when the demands are unjustified, or when workers who cannot afford to strike or don't agree with the reasons for the strike are threatened and hurt, then I think it's time to stand up as a country and decide that we won't be held ransom anymore.
What do you think? Let us know on Facebook…