Yay. Get bent Howard Shultz. Same for you Jeff bezos. You union busting pos.
this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2023
323 points (99.4% liked)
Antiwork
8305 readers
2 users here now
-
We're trying to reduce the numbers of hours a person has to work.
-
We talk about the end of paid work being mandatory for survival.
Partnerships:
- Matrix/Element chatroom
- Discord (channel: #antiwork)
- IRC: #antiwork on IRCNow.org (i.e., connect to ircs://irc.ircnow.org and
/join #antiwork) - Your facebook group link here
- Your x link here
- lemmy.ca/c/antiwork
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
This is huge.
If it's actually enforced, anyway.
NLRB and DOL tend not to fuck around
The main issue that this doesn't deal with is that it in no way stops a company from straight up closing any location that does try to unionize.
"Oh no, we must recognize your union... and in unrelated news, your location is now closed. Feel free to apply to the new location we're opening up a block away."
Sure they could do that, year after year, but they might as well sink that cost into giving the union what it wants after once or twice
Tell that to Starbucks. Already doing it
They can't do it forever. They're desperately hoping the union drive will give up soon.
That's literally why there's a Starbucks on every corner; they want the option of closing down up to 90% of them to keep away from Unions
That doesn't change that they can't do it forever.
They'll keep paying union electricians and carpenters to do it.
A) That is union busting
B) It's fucking expensive, both in actual costs and lost revenue, to keep doing that. Eventually the company will realize they can't afford it and stop, or they'll go bankrupt.
C) Being forced to recognize the union means you need to negotiate with the union. Which means you need to make a union contract. Which can include language about how closing down locations is handled. Or how opening up new locations is handled. Like, say, they can only hire new union workers. So they can close down 1 location, then they have to hire union anyway at the new location, so what's the point?
To be blunt, what you're describing has exactly 0% chance of working out in the company's favour over the long term. More than that, it has little chance of even working in the first place. It's this absurd idea based in nothing.
I want to believe you but five decades on this earth remind me that what you say is just pie in the sky
Yay. Get bent Howard Shultz. Same for you Jeff bezos. You union busting pos.
I don't care if you commented this twice, I'm upvoting both.
I hope it's commented again, it can use more up votes.
So 99% of workers will be unionized now?
I'll believe it when I see it.
Came here to say the same exact thing. Lol
Why aren't retail managers protected for union stuff?
Nvm I read it. It's because the managers manage the workers and thus it would be a conflict of interest. The managers are for the company and the workers are the union.
Good managers are to protect company interests but not at the expense of the workers. Managers should be making employee work lives easier and better. Take care of your employees and everything else takes care of itself. Problem comes in when managers who don’t know how to manage people get involved. You can manage process well and still suck at the human (more important) side of things.
I've heard it said that this is why, sometimes, a lot of people are given the title "manager' when they're not really in any sort of managerial positions. It prevents them from entering unions as easily.
Take that with a grain of salt though.