It's true that for most furry businesses it is essentially irrelevant; but I could see some furry organizations - such as MFF - being big enough and containing sufficient stratification that there could be a space for representation of some kind for classes of both volunteers and attendees in disputes with management - including both operational (e.g. MFF's VPs) and strategic (the board).
Wages are, after all, just one component of an employee/employer relationship; working conditions and 'perks' (formal or otherwise) remain quite realistic topics of volunteer/management negotiation, be it in specific departments or generally. On the attendee side, I could see artists/dealers and fursuiters emerging as coherent groups. Any of these might wish to extract special treatment or concessions in return for their participation - or have grievances which could benefit from the involvement of a professional mediator.
While such representation might not have the same legal standing as that of an employee union, it could have practical standing, if the issue was big enough that a significant number of the class were willing to 'strike' over it. As I understand it, a big part of union legislation formalizing such representational arrangements; to limit abuses that can be committed on both sides with their respective powers, to the benefit of the community.
Of course, hopefully convention (and dealer/website/...) management continues to be close enough to their fellows and share enough common interest that disputes can be resolved amicably. But it may be a mistake to assume that this will always be the case; and at the scale we're getting to, the alternatives to formal representation of parties could feasibly include a dispute leading to the informal collapse of a million-dollar operation.
It's true that for most furry businesses it is essentially irrelevant; but I could see some furry organizations - such as MFF - being big enough and containing sufficient stratification that there could be a space for representation of some kind for classes of both volunteers and attendees in disputes with management - including both operational (e.g. MFF's VPs) and strategic (the board).
Wages are, after all, just one component of an employee/employer relationship; working conditions and 'perks' (formal or otherwise) remain quite realistic topics of volunteer/management negotiation, be it in specific departments or generally. On the attendee side, I could see artists/dealers and fursuiters emerging as coherent groups. Any of these might wish to extract special treatment or concessions in return for their participation - or have grievances which could benefit from the involvement of a professional mediator.
While such representation might not have the same legal standing as that of an employee union, it could have practical standing, if the issue was big enough that a significant number of the class were willing to 'strike' over it. As I understand it, a big part of union legislation formalizing such representational arrangements; to limit abuses that can be committed on both sides with their respective powers, to the benefit of the community.
Of course, hopefully convention (and dealer/website/...) management continues to be close enough to their fellows and share enough common interest that disputes can be resolved amicably. But it may be a mistake to assume that this will always be the case; and at the scale we're getting to, the alternatives to formal representation of parties could feasibly include a dispute leading to the informal collapse of a million-dollar operation.