Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Swedish dockworkers are refusing to unload Teslas at ports in broad boycott move

text.npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 230 posts

Re: Swedish dockworkers are refusing to unload Teslas at ports in broad boycott move

#121

Post by standardUser »

JohnFen wrote: post #41
djbusby wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Solidarity Action https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarity_action In Australia, Latvia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, the United States, and the United Kingdom, solidarity action is theoretically illegal, and strikes can only be against the contractual employer.

How does that even work? I am, and should be, free to not show up to work for any reason I choose. If I'm legally required to work, isn't that forced labor?

You'd be fired. In many countries, you could not be fired legally.

Re: Swedish dockworkers are refusing to unload Teslas at ports in broad boycott move

#122

Post by SoftTalker »

nirvdrum wrote: post #79
orangepurple wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the theory. In America, the union benefits the union first, the employee second, and the employer a very distant third if at all.

That’s a pretty broad brush you’re using. My experience is mostly with the IBEW and so won’t be applicable in all cases. But, the employer gets a flexible, locally licensed work force. They can hire as many people as they need off the union book (no need for lengthy recruitment, skill assessment, and compensation negotiation) on demand and they can lay off electricians as a job winds down. Each local contract will be…

It's my impression that the skilled trades unions (electricians, ironworkers, steamfitters, etc.) are different from e.g. the UAW. UAW is not running an apprenticeship program for autoworkers. UAW members are not employed as needed on demand by the auto manufacturers. Unions like the UAW exist almost completely as a collective bargaining organization for employment contracts with big automakers.

Is this incorrect?

Re: Swedish dockworkers are refusing to unload Teslas at ports in broad boycott move

#123

Post by JumpCrisscross »

mrtksn wrote: post #119
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Twitter's market cap was 44B and now undefined because its not on the market It’s still absolutely on a market, down to being valued and trading. It’s just not on a public market.

It can be true if there are people buying and selling stocks among themselves but that's really out of topic since we are discussing public markets.

> that's really out of topic since we are discussing public markets

You said the market cap is “undefined.” That is incorrect. Market cap is price per share times shares outstanding. If a company has shares, its market cap is defined by at least one among several metrics.

Re: Swedish dockworkers are refusing to unload Teslas at ports in broad boycott move

#124

Post by freeopinion »

simlevesque wrote: post #20
freeopinion wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm actually curious about how the union would benefit these mechanics. How is their current treatment by Tesla deemed inadequate?

The workers want it. Their laws say they have a right to it. There's no arguing past that. Let me ask you a question: why do you deserve any respect ? I'm just curious. I'm not seriously asking, just showing you how your question is bullshit.

I wasn't asking in an anti-union stance. I'm actually curious.

Of course I understand the general purpose of a labor union. But I also understand that there are many situations where a union is unnecessary and actually detrimental to the labor force.

For example, if I pay all my employees the same wage I make and pay for the same insurance and retirement plan I have, would it be beneficial to my employees to join a union? Sure, this hypothetical is extreme, but it's just to examine the idea.

Is a union a good thing if there are no abuses from which labor needs to be protected? So why do these employees want a union? What are the benefits if there are no abuses? If there are abuses, what are they?

I'd really like to know the specifics. I'm not arguing that there could be no benefit. I'm asking what the benefits are in this specific case. I expect that there are some but I don't want to assume what they are.

I hope that you will understand that my question was not as belligerent as yours seems to me.

Re: Swedish dockworkers are refusing to unload Teslas at ports in broad boycott move

#125

Post by Snild »

0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #74

Recent blog post about unions that I found interesting: >Let’s say a nation is concerned about poverty. So it passes a law that says the rich will have some of their money redistributed to the poor. But instead of a progressive income tax used to fund cash payments to the unfortunate, the government decides that wealthy people who happened to be born in the spring will give their money to poor people whose birthdays…

Swedish unions do not mandate membership, and do not "prevent other people from being hired", unless they're talking about speculative indirect effects like "setting a minimum salary kills jobs".

Members and non-members work together at the same companies, and the collective agreements between the unions and the employer organizations apply to all employees, not just members.

Re: Swedish dockworkers are refusing to unload Teslas at ports in broad boycott move

#126

Post by VoodooJuJu »

simlevesque wrote: post #3

Good for them. I love to see workers uniting. In this increasingly globalized world, each country is still different. You can't expect swedish workers to accept that you treat them like american workers just because your company is big. I really like this part: > Even postal workers will stop delivering mail to Tesla

[flagged]

Re: Swedish dockworkers are refusing to unload Teslas at ports in broad boycott move

#127

Post by mrtksn »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #123
mrtksn wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can be true if there are people buying and selling stocks among themselves but that's really out of topic since we are discussing public markets.

> that's really out of topic since we are discussing public markets You said the market cap is “undefined.” That is incorrect. Market cap is price per share times shares outstanding. If a company has shares, its market cap is defined by at least one among several metrics.

I agree, you are technically correct which is the best kind of correct I guess but it's irrelevant IMHO.

Re: Swedish dockworkers are refusing to unload Teslas at ports in broad boycott move

#128

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

Snild wrote: post #125
0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #74

Recent blog post about unions that I found interesting: >Let’s say a nation is concerned about poverty. So it passes a law that says the rich will have some of their money redistributed to the poor. But instead of a progressive income tax used to fund cash payments to the unfortunate, the government decides that wealthy people who happened to be born in the spring will give their money to poor people whose birthdays…

Swedish unions do not mandate membership, and do not "prevent other people from being hired", unless they're talking about speculative indirect effects like "setting a minimum salary kills jobs". Members and non-members work together at the same companies, and the collective agreements between the unions and the employer organizations apply to all employees, not just members.

From elsewhere in this thread:

"A key reason for the sympathy strikes is that Tesla brought in scabs which is a big no-no in Scandinavian labor markets."

Sounds like an attempt to prevent other people from being hired.

Re: setting a minimum salary -- suppose we set the minimum price of burgers at $100/burger. Do you think that would cause people to buy fewer burgers? I don't think "minimum salary kills jobs" is speculative; I think it should be the default hypothesis. Force the price of something to be high and people will purchase it less. Force the price of labor to be high and unemployment will increase. Especially for low-skilled immigrants whose main way to compete is willingness to work for low wages.

Re: Swedish dockworkers are refusing to unload Teslas at ports in broad boycott move

#129

Post by legitster »

simlevesque wrote: post #49
mikestew wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, in less derogatory terms, "strikebreaker": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strikebreaker

There's no reason to use that term.

We're enjoying a very labor-friendly market, but there are many examples in certain periods where unions locked up good, well-paying jobs behind exclusionary, nepotistic, and racist membership practices.

So I would be happy to distinguish between a scab who is looking to make a quick buck and a strikebreaker who was never eligible for a union job in the first place. Depends on the context.

Re: Swedish dockworkers are refusing to unload Teslas at ports in broad boycott move

#130

Post by sroussey »

progbits wrote: post #11
changoplatanero wrote: post #2

What's the argument for how unions benefit both parties? What do unions do to benefit the employer?

Why do they have to benefit the employer?

If they bankrupt the employer then they would be out of a job. Or the union contract gets renegotiated.
Post reply on HN