Not true, you could make it a tort instead of a law, where employees can sue for punitive damages if secret negotiations have occurred. No guns necessary.
Really? A tort will get you a fine, refuse to pay it and they will send you to jail, resist your arrest and they will use their guns. No way around that.
Not every attempt at "resisting" the force of law results in being shot.
You're stretching the concept of the monopoly on violence and the "men with guns" metaphor to absurdity, when the "violence" in that context involves all compulsory interactions with the state, including mere arrest and detainment, or even having to buy postage stamps to send a letter.
This isn't really how it works, we don't have debtors prisons. If you don't pay a civil judgement against you then the debtholder gets permission to garnish your wages and bank accounts or seizure your assets. If you have no wages, bank accounts, or assets the judgement doesn't get paid.
