111–120 of 178 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This completely ignores globalization and the fact it was geopolitics that took the jobs away.
The unions were instrumental in getting the people pushing globalism elected.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These companies need to remember that NLRB and unionization was an agreement to take harsh violence off the table. In the old days, when First International and IWW was created, unionization efforts were to "set the bosses house on fire, with them in it", "pass out rifles to all workers and shoot up the bosses house", assaults, bombs.. you name it. That's also where we have the paramilitary force, Pinkertons. They we…
Will you be the first to raise your guns and go to prison after?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. Companies hate unions because they increase labor costs and benefits. Does anyone really think corporate anti-union talking points are in their workers' best interest? Unions have their faults (e.g. bureaucracy), but corporations aren't fighting them for their employees' benefit.
Well, Walmart non union workers still have their jobs while the ones that did unionize all lost theirs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I’m not sure I agree with that statement either…
let go all of the employees that work for apple an see how long they are still in business. Don't think the CEO is making their iphones on the line
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see a specific mention of what exactly they did that was violating the law. Employers are allowed to talk to their employees about why they don't think a union is in the best interest of everyone involved. You are right though, it won't be a popular opinion, but a union's strength should not be impacted by taking down fliers in a break room. There are also laws saying that the company can't lie to employees a…
> You are right though, it won't be a popular opinion, but a union's strength should not be impacted by taking down fliers in a break room. Why not? I don't see a way this makes sense unless we conveniently forget all about marketing, psychology and the like.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Virtually all companies oppose unionization. Am I to believe that all these companies are doing so out of sheer incompetence?
These companies need to remember that NLRB and unionization was an agreement to take harsh violence off the table. In the old days, when First International and IWW was created, unionization efforts were to "set the bosses house on fire, with them in it", "pass out rifles to all workers and shoot up the bosses house", assaults, bombs.. you name it. That's also where we have the paramilitary force, Pinkertons. They we…
Which is still around, though now a child company of Securitas.
Just goes to show how effective unionizing is. Power to those workers! They're a key part in making Apple one of the most valuable companies in the world. They deserve a fair share.
Indeed. Companies hate unions because they increase labor costs and benefits. Does anyone really think corporate anti-union talking points are in their workers' best interest? Unions have their faults (e.g. bureaucracy), but corporations aren't fighting them for their employees' benefit.
You know, Apple's shareholders and corporate board could be entirely replaced by AI and it wouldn't hurt the profitability of the company... and think of all the money that could be saved! They could invest in moving their entire production line back to the USA and then wouldn't have to worry about supply chain disruptions, while also expanding their research & development division to keep ahead of the competition. W…
Just goes to show how effective unionizing is. Power to those workers! They're a key part in making Apple one of the most valuable companies in the world. They deserve a fair share.
Meanwhile in China, all union except the state-driven ones are illegal. Deng Xiaoping took away the right to go onstrike because "the communist party is owned by the worker and represents the best interest of the workers".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You are right though, it won't be a popular opinion, but a union's strength should not be impacted by taking down fliers in a break room. Why not? I don't see a way this makes sense unless we conveniently forget all about marketing, psychology and the like.
This is not some fancy new phone...this is an almost permanent obligation you are placing on the company, the employees and future employees. The decision to join a union should be placed on facts and only facts.
Wow, so you seriously just ignore it all. Why do you think that humans are susceptible to marketing in the context of a phone, and not in unionization? Where is the difference?
> this is an almost permanent obligation you are placing on the company, the employees and future employees. The decision to join a union should be placed on facts and only facts.
Sure, but what if you suppress delivery of facts about unions while supplying your own counter-facts?