Silence

wondering....

I am a wondering person. There are many things i dont' understand, or if i do, i'm wondering how it works. Let's look into the demostration case in Cambodia.
How come Cambodian people like the idea to strike in order to deliver their messenge? i'm wondering why. If the garmen workers are not happy with the owners, they definately going on strike. If the teachers are not happy with the gov't, strike would be a usual solution. If people are not happy with the official, strike! If a party doesnt like the way gov't do, they strike to voice out.
I'm wondering whether those people know the pros or cons of demonstration. And, i'm wondering is strike the only way to solve problems? Strike, as far as i know, is a threat. It is used to threat the other party to accept the terms and conditions they have set. But, strike doesn't work for most of the time. In contrast, it creates negative or disadvantage to the strikers. what ppl gain from strike? a waste of time, energy, and risk their life for unimportant issues, let alone the public stability.
Well, the reason that ppl going on strike is because they couldn't negotiate to get what they want. I'm wondering why don't ppl take the times and energy to discuss and improve their negotiation skill instead of strike. why not try to get ppl into the talk, discuss and debate. After all, we are a demoncracy country. Demoncracy means talking, discussing, debating and re-talking, re-discussing, re-debating before going on physical strike. On part of that, negotiation skill is the way to get things done, not strike. what garmen factory workers gain if they get the owners accept what they ask by striking? would the owners happy and want to work with them? would the owners consider the other option of shifting their work to a safer place with no strike at all? i think so.

posted by chhorng @ 9:49 AM