French Air Traffic Controllers Protest Against Anti-Protest Laws Passed by French Parliament

I wasn't a controller but in Airway Facilities and I learned how to handle flight strips pretty well. Those were the days!

Some organization in the French air industry are always striking. If you 'really' have to get to your destination on time, don't fly through Paris.

I have found that "Common Sense" is not nearly as "Common" as it used to be!

The choice to strike in France is a constitutional right.

Why? Because people should just do whatever you want?

Obviously, you don't know what you're talking about:
1) the airways were saturated, but the FAA did not want to bear the odium and financial prosecutions from users following the implementation of a national flow control plan that would cause loss of privileges;
2) several airlines maintained flights with occupancy rates below the break-even point because they did not want to give up gate privileges to competition and without compensation;
3) after PATCO, Reagan was going to have to negotiate with very powerful unions like the Teamsters and the idea of setting an example is not excluded.
As a result, large-scale flow control restrictions were implemented justified by the strike, airlines could cut back on non profitable flights without penalties, airport authorities do not have to pay compensation to airlines for unoccupied gates, and the message is very strong to the unions.
Everyone was happy except the controllers, of course.
One must be naïve however to think that you are going to lay off 85% (11,000/13,000) of a highly skilled workforce and hope that in a short time the system will be working normally. What history doesn't tell is the number of controllers (estimated at 8000 for some) who returned to work without making too much noise and the government's honeyed promises to bring them back. The government did not call in the military. After the March 5, 1973 midair collision in France, everyone had learned his lesson.
Beyond the significant damage caused to the world of aviation by Reagan's blunt decision, it is the damage to the union cause that is most permanent to date. Because after all, what the controllers wanted was:
…they were initially motivated by the desire to make the system safer and to have a voice in policies that would do this — this was something that their employer, the Federal Aviation Administration resisted.”
But it turned out that:
One of the most devastating and harmful moments in the history of labor unions was what happened with the PATCO strikes…
Even though before he was elected, Reagan had said:
“my administration will work very closely with you to bring about a spirit of cooperation between the president and the air traffic controllers.”

Sure? See the rest…

This, of course, gave PATCO hope and they would end up endorsing Ronald Reagan for president of the United States. However, when Reagan was elected, there was a lot of pressure from the right wing to handle the situation with PATCO in a way that would damage labor unions as a whole.
Seek more information before making such statement.

Ronald Reagan’s Impact on Labor Unions | by Hannah Mueller | The Future of Labor Unions | Medium

As is the U.S. We've had 200 labor strikes since 2010. https://www.bls.gov/wsp/factsheets/summary-of-work-stoppages-in-the-united-states.htm