That's not how it works.
The employer is required by law to "negotiate" with the union. And if the union doesn't like the employer's offer, they can take it to the NLRB, and the employer is required by law to abide by the NLRB's ruling. Not to mention that while "negotiating" with the union, the employer is under constant threat of union violence, which is usually ignored by the local police: e.g. assaulting non-union replacement workers or trespassing on company property to interrupt work.
That is not negotiation, that's extortion.
Now let's talk about the right to strike. If strike means go home and refuse to work, no problem. No one has ever questioned the right of workers to quit their jobs. But that's the not the issue. When unions speak of a right to strike they mean something completely different. They mean the "right" to prevent the employer from hiring replacements. Or the "right" to occupy the factory to prevent it from running. Those are not rights!
Consider all the violent strikes in American labor history. What happened? Did the workers go home and the owner sent Pinkertons to their houses to force them back to work? No, of course not. What happened is that the workers tried to attack replacement workers and/or occupy the factory, and the owner brought in Pinkertons or national guard or whatever to remove the violent criminals attacking his employees and property.
"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: