3 ms·
> Doing this right after your employees unionize makes you an asshole. No, it doesn't. Gothamist is not a small coal mining town where workers have all but on
by eps 9y ago
> Doing this right after your employees unionize makes you an asshole.
No, it doesn't.
Gothamist is not a small coal mining town where workers have all but one choice of an employer. There unions made sense. You don't bunch together, you and your family starve. Here, unionization is an attempt to squeeze more perks and money from their existing employer, simply because it's easier and more comfortable to do than to look for another job.
- anigbrowl 9y agoDid they go out on strike? No. they have every right to act collectively if that's how they prefer to structure their labor. Either freedom of association means something or it doesn't.
- ejnulls 9y agoLOL. Not unionizing is literally being a bad business-man/woman. Good business-people exploit all legal avenues to maximize their leverage...and if it's not legal, they lobby to make it legal so they can further maximize leverage. But I suppose it follows, a good business-person is a bad employee. However, I believe with every fiber of my being that employees should follow the examples set by their bosses to be successful. If the boss is doing everything to maximize their leverage over competitors (and their employees - ie pushing for more STEM education to increase supply of workers so they can pay them less), employees MUST follow in the footsteps of their bosses. Not exploiting every avenue for leverage in a system as cut-throat as capitalism only serves to exacerbaate inequality. Based on those thoughts, I believe unionizing is the patriotic thing to do. I will say though, I would love to see new types of unions emerge that are more efficient than those of yesteryear.