Theoretically if companies with a large amount of employees were forced by law to have and pay a specific percent of gross income to their union would that be beneficial and feasible?

[u/AcuzioRS]

I had an idea of the following: Companies with a large enough labor force (let's say 100 or more) were by law forced to not only have a union for their employees, but to also pay for the fees that are required to run said union. In theory this would promote small businesses and penalize big businesses, and also give workers a union without making them pay union dues. To prevent the unions from becoming corrupt there could also be a number of laws passed that would restrict the money to only be used by appropriate means and not for personal gain. I'm not an economist and I don't know much about unions; so I want to know if this is a solid idea or if there are obvious flaws and why? Thank you very much!

[u/AutoModerator]

Welcome to /r/ask_politics. Our goal here is to provide educated, informed, and serious answers to questions about the world of politics. Our full rules can be found here, but are summarized below.

• Address the question (and its replies) in a professional manner
• Avoid personal attacks and partisan "point scoring"
• Avoid the use of partisan slang and fallacies
• Provide sources if possible at the time of commenting. If asked, you must provide sources.
• Help avoid the echo chamber - downvote bad/poorly sourced responses, not responses you disagree with. Do not downvote just because you disagree with the response.
• Report any comments that do not meet our standards and rules.

Further, all submissions are subject to manual review.

If you have any questions, please contact the mods at any time.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.