Some feel that individuals should have the right to strike in all jobs while others feel there are exceptions. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion. Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

The

right

to

strike

is a contentious issue, with few arguing that individuals should have the unrestricted

right

to

strike

in all jobs,

while

others contend that there should be exceptions. Both views have compelling arguments yet I believe the

right

to

strike

should generally be protected

while

considering certain exceptions. On one hand, proponents of the

right

to

strike

in all jobs emphasize the importance of protecting workers’ rights and ensuring their collective bargaining power. In brief, it upholds the principles of freedom of association and expression, enabling teams to collectively exercise their democratic rights. The successful strikes of factory employees in Bangladesh in 2013,

for instance

, led to improved safety regulations and working conditions in the garment industry, profiting numerous people.

On the other hand

, opponents argue that strikes in certain jobs should be exempted

due to

their critical nature. Elaborating on

this

, public safety and essential services,

such

as healthcare, emergency services, and transportation, require uninterrupted operation for the well-being and security of society.

For example

, a

strike

by air traffic controllers could lead to flight cancellations, stranded passengers, or even compromising emergency response in case of an incident. In my opinion, granting all job holders the

right

to

strike

fosters a more equitable and inclusive society. With appropriate safeguards and regulations in place,

such

as requiring advance notice or alternative arrangements for critical services, the potential risks and disruptions can be mitigated. In conclusion, despite the

right

to

strike

in all work fields is justifiable, a few critical fields should be taken into account;

however

, I concur constructing a common ground for both approaches is valid

while

negotiating or adopting alternative dispute resolution methods to help reconcile the

right

to

strike

with the critical needs of certain fields.