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

171–180 of 230 posts

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

#171

Post by afandian »

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…

How does the employer avoid having to do skill assessment? Do they trust the union?

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

#172

Post by burevestnik »

apwell23 wrote: post #166
abdullahkhalids wrote: post #57

I don't actually agree with unions, but not for the "usual" reasons. Unions are a scotch-tape fix to a broken economic system, which gives enormous powers to the capitalistic class at the expense of all others. The correct solution is to fix the actual system. All large companies should be by constitutional law (controlling) majority owned 1/n by their workers. All this exploitation will disappear because workers wil…

> All large companies when a company goes from small to large, original owners lose their ownership? Wouldn't they stop themselves from becoming large in order not lose their ownership .

This would be the ideal outcome because it would keep companies small, in turn their market shares remain small, leaving room for lots of competition.

Not sure the proposal would actually lead to this outcome, but it is a good outcome in my book.

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

#174

Post by Snild »

0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #128
Snild wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 specu…

No, that's a reaction to the employer trying to circumvent the strike. It's an attempt to ensure that the strike is effective, and wouldn't normally happen.

(also, the sympathy strikers object to the hiring of other people _to do the strikers' tasks _, not hiring in general.)

> Force the price of labor to be high and unemployment will increase.

If you don't, there will be a race to the bottom and people won't have a liveable wage.

Besides, Tesla is claiming that their compensation is better than the the collective agreement's minimum, and if that's to be taken at face value, clearly the agreement's cost of labor isn't too high.

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

#176

Post by SauciestGNU »

whalesalad wrote: post #61
malermeister wrote: post #39

Meanwhile, statement from the Union: https://www.arbetaren.se/2023/11/13/if-metall-strejkkassan-r... "Our strike fund is enough to keep this up for 500 years."

On one hand, that is epic. On the other hand, it means the union has leached a monumental amount of capital out of the workers and industries they are involved with. A union should not have that much cash in the bank.

It's an arms race, they need parity with the industry so they can't be starved out.

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

#177

Post by xenospn »

orangetuba wrote: post #167
sisve wrote: post #73

Interesting. How is this in Norway? I assume tesla fights union's there also. The culture and value system where union employers and the government is working together is standing really strong in Norway. Could this spread to the Norwegian Market? How big is the Norwegian Market for tesla now? Some years ago it was significant, but I assume the rest of the world is catching up and that its not that important anymore?

Norway is not nearly as woke as Sweden, so I doubt it.

Are you somehow equating unions with wokeness?

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

#178

Post by apwell23 »

burevestnik wrote: post #172
apwell23 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All large companies when a company goes from small to large, original owners lose their ownership? Wouldn't they stop themselves from becoming large in order not lose their ownership .

This would be the ideal outcome because it would keep companies small, in turn their market shares remain small, leaving room for lots of competition. Not sure the proposal would actually lead to this outcome, but it is a good outcome in my book.

wouldn't that defeat the whole point of gp's proposal of worker owned production ( vs capital owned ) . Why does worker ownership not matter in small companies?

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

#179

Post by eesmith »

legitster wrote: post #160
japanuspus wrote: post #16

Important context which I could not find mentioned in TFA: A key reason for the sympathy strikes is that Tesla brought in scabs which is a big no-no in Scandinavian labor markets.

Is there a reference to the scabs? I am not seeing that anywhere in the article. It just says that Tesla doesn't have a signed labor contract with its mechanics - it doesn't appear that there is any strike or dispute. So it might not be "scabs" in our sense of the word.

Not in the linked-to NPR article. See "Strikebreakers arrived by taxi to Tesla's workshops in Sweden" on HN 17 days ago, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38085231, 55 comments and "Tesla threatens to bring in strikebreakers as Swedish workers strike" 21 days ago, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38036143, 151 comments.

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

#180

Post by nirvdrum »

afandian wrote: post #171
nirvdrum wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

How does the employer avoid having to do skill assessment? Do they trust the union?

They trust the certification body. Either you demonstrably know the electrical code or you don’t. And the union requires its members to have their licenses (save for apprentices — but they can wash out).

Imagine how much time we could all save if an impartial body certified developers can do breadth first search or reverse strings. No need for all of those phone screen and first round interview questions.

Post reply on HN