top of page

Individuals Should Have The Right to Strike in All Jobs - IELTS Task 2 Band 9 Sample Essay

You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.


Write about the following topic:


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 and experiences.


You should write at least 250 words.


IELTS Task 2 Band 9 Sample Essay based on the question prompt "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."

Get your personalised IELTS Essay Feedback from a former examiner


Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score



Model Essay 1

The debate on the universality of strike rights reflects diverse perspectives on workplace democracy and public safety. On one hand, advocating for unrestricted strike rights underscores the fundamental principle of collective bargaining. On the other, certain exemptions are deemed necessary for critical sectors to ensure uninterrupted essential services. This essay explores these contrasting viewpoints and argues in favor of a balanced approach that respects workers' rights while safeguarding societal interests.


Advocates for unrestricted strike rights posit that the ability to strike is a cornerstone of labor democracy, allowing workers to negotiate fair terms and conditions of employment. This perspective is rooted in the belief that all employees, regardless of their profession, should have equal leverage against employers. For instance, the successful teachers' strikes across various countries have led to significant improvements in pay and working conditions, illustrating the positive outcomes of unrestricted strike rights.


Conversely, the argument for exceptions is predicated on the premise that certain sectors are too vital to be disrupted. Emergency services, healthcare, and utilities are often cited examples where strikes could endanger lives or cause significant societal harm. The 2014 healthcare workers' strike in England, which excluded emergency care, demonstrates a model where essential services were maintained while allowing workers to express their grievances.


Balancing these perspectives requires a nuanced approach that recognizes the right to strike as fundamental but accepts limitations in critical sectors. Such a framework should include mechanisms like mandatory arbitration and essential service maintenance during strikes, ensuring that the public's safety and well-being are not compromised.


In conclusion, while the right to strike is a pivotal aspect of labor relations, it is imperative to recognize that certain exceptions are necessary for the greater good. A balanced approach that allows workers to advocate for their rights without endangering public safety or essential services is essential. This essay advocates for a system that honors the spirit of collective bargaining while responsibly delineating boundaries for strike actions in critical sectors.


Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score



Model Essay 2

The question of universal strike rights juxtaposes the principles of labor freedom against the imperative of maintaining essential services. This discourse navigates between advocating for unconditional strike rights to highlight labor empowerment and arguing for prudent exceptions to preserve societal function. This essay will deliberate on these viewpoints, advocating for a pragmatic approach that harmonizes workers' rights with the essential needs of society.


On the one hand, the unconditional right to strike symbolizes a powerful tool for workforce advocacy, enabling workers to negotiate better conditions and remuneration. It embodies a democratic right to dissent and advocate for equitable treatment in the workplace. For instance, the 2018 educators' strike in the United States not only spotlighted the chronic underfunding of public schools but also led to increased investment in education, showcasing the efficacy of strike action in catalyzing positive change.


On the contrary, the argument for exceptions in strike rights stems from the necessity to ensure the uninterrupted provision of critical services that underpin public safety and welfare. It is posited that sectors like healthcare, firefighting, and public transport should have regulated strike capabilities to prevent jeopardizing public safety and economic stability. The 2016 air traffic controllers' strike in France, while limited in scope to minimize disruption, underscores the complex balance between asserting labor rights and ensuring public safety.


Striking a balance between these positions necessitates a nuanced strategy that respects the right to strike, yet recognizes the critical nature of certain services. This involves establishing clear guidelines for minimal service levels during strikes, coupled with robust negotiation frameworks to address grievances before they escalate to industrial action.


In summary, while the right to strike is paramount in advocating for workers' rights, it is equally crucial to delineate exceptions for critical services to safeguard public welfare. Advocating for a balanced approach ensures that the workforce can exercise their rights without compromising the essential services upon which society relies. This reconciliation of labor rights with public necessity is pivotal for a harmonious and functioning society.


Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score



Model Essay 3

The debate over whether all workers should have the right to strike or if there should be exceptions for certain critical positions has been ongoing. Although some individuals advocate for the universal right of all employees to go on strike to express their grievances, exceptions must be made for workers in critical positions such as firefighters and doctors due to the potential negative consequences on public safety. I will delve deeper into this concept in the essay.


Advocates of the former perspective posit that employees possess the inherent right to engage in strikes against their employers if they feel dissatisfied. The paramount objective appears to be the ability to articulate their grievances and apprehensions when their employers fail to take timely action. It is axiomatic that the lower the remuneration of workers, the higher the likelihood of job-related setbacks. Hence, striking workers aim to secure concessions from their employers by demanding higher wages, better working conditions, and reduced working hours. Striking, therefore, constitutes a practical and feasible means for employees to assert their rights and voice their concerns. For example, in my country, Azerbaijan, schoolteachers organized a strike and assembled outside school premises, clamouring for a raise in their meagre salaries, which prompted the school administration to revise their policies and accede to their demands. Nonetheless, it is not tenable to assume that every worker in every job can initiate a strike.


Given the vast array of professions worldwide, it would be futile to persuade every worker to stage a protest at their workplaces with the hope of obtaining concessions. The primary reason is that individuals who earn their livelihood as firefighters or doctors and opt to participate in collective action cannot be deemed responsible workers from an ethical standpoint. Indeed, their jobs play a crucial role in safeguarding human lives. Picturing a blazing inferno or a child in a life-threatening situation contradicts the notion of those who believe in the feasibility of strikes. Although workers have the natural right to strike, according to the National Labour Act, their decisions can lead to grief, despair, or even the death of innocent individuals.


In conclusion, although the right to strike is vital for workers to voice their concerns and advocate for improved work conditions, it is imperative to acknowledge the inherent risks associated with certain critical positions, such as those of firefighters and doctors, and make appropriate exceptions to safeguard public safety.

Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score



Model Essay 4

Since there has been a conflict between workers and management, some people are of the opinion that each person should have the right to go on strike regardless of their job, while others believe in the existence of exceptions. I will introduce both perspectives in support of the latter.


Proponents of the former view claim that employees have the right to strike against their workplaces if they are dissatisfied. The most important aspect appears to be being able to express their dissatisfaction as well as their concerns when their employers do not take action on time. It goes without saying that the less workers earn, the more work-related setbacks occur, meaning that striking employees desire to gain concessions from their bosses by increasing their wages, providing them with high-quality work conditions, and reducing lengthy working hours. Striking is therefore a viable and pragmatic way to enable employees to defend their rights and speak out. For instance, in my country, Azerbaijan, school teachers went on strike and congregated outside the school building, requesting to raise their low salaries, which resulted in having our school administrations shift their policy and accept the change. However, it does not necessarily mean that every single labourer in each job is able to commence a strike.


Considering the limitless number of jobs all around the world, it would be futile to convince everyone to rebel at their workplaces in hope of demanding concessions. The foremost reason is that people who earn their money by working as a firefighter or a doctor and opt to engage in concerted activities cannot ethically be considered responsible workers. In fact, their jobs play a crucially important role in people's lives. Imagining a burning house or a child in a fatal situation contrasts with the ones who believe in the likelihood of striking. Even though workers have the natural right to be on strike, according to the National Labour Act, their decisions may either lead to sorrow and grief or the death of an innocent child. Hence, working individuals ought to find out various ways to deal with work problems, and I would argue that there is an influx of options for anyone who desires positive changes at work.


In conclusion, while I acknowledge the advantage of having rights in terms of all workers going on strike, I believe that seeking different solutions will be a far better choice.

Get your personalised IELTS Essay Feedback from a former examiner


Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score

Comments


bottom of page