5 ms·

This is the United States. One of our two political parties is vehemently opposed to workers rights on the claim that it inhibits profit/greed.

jstanley 8y ago
That's a complete strawman. Nobody is claiming that workers' rights should be limited so that employers can make more money. People are claiming that workers' rights should be limited to the same extent that employers' rights are limited (i.e. that either party can end the relationship at any time and without any specific reason) so as to avoid giving excess power to one party or the other.
- prolikewhoa 8y ago
  Who does all of the work? That's right, the workers. The workers should have the excess of power in all circumstances. The only reason we have weekends and the "40" hour work week is because of workers and left wing movements. Corporations would have never let such happen, and are historically against the worker & only in favor of raking in profit at the expense of labor. Edit: point proven, HN doesn't care about labor rights and prefers rights for corporations over the actual workers who make the corporation.
  - twblalock 8y ago
    > Edit: point proven, HN doesn't care about labor rights and prefers rights for corporations over the actual workers who make the corporation. There is plenty of room for disagreement among people who accept that workers should have rights -- for example, what should the rights be, how should those rights be balanced against the rights of management, etc.
    - lovich 8y ago
      There is room for disagreement but there is certainly a strong anti labor sentiment on this board. There's a strong pro labor group as well, but I have seen people on here state outright that unions are inherently immoral and not just that unions as they have turned on in specific situations are bad.
- hackbinary 8y ago
  The employer inherently has more power than the employee. That is why worker's rights are important.
  - adventured 8y ago
    The business belongs to the employer typically, they should have far more power over their own business than an average employee does. Inverting that is crazy. I take a job at your 30 year old business that you've run for your entire adult lifetime, now I have more power over it than you do, all because I took a job = perpetual stagnation ala France.
    - lazyasciiart 8y ago
      Ok, now do "I took a job at a huge multinational that you've worked at for your entire adult lifetime, now I have more power over your job than you do, all because I graduated with a minor in HR last month".
      - bena 8y ago
        And? That's the decision of the person who owns the business. Not yours, and not the HR person's. The person who owns the business has decided that this is the process by which he wants employees vetted because they do not have the time to personally oversee every decision. See, you've actually moved the goalposts here and you may not have realized it.
        lazyasciiart 8y ago
        I'm not sure if you read the comment I was responding to, but it sounds like if you had, you would agree that it was presenting a totally irrelevant argument.
        bena 8y ago
        No it's not. He was talking about the owner losing power over his own business due to hiring an employee. That is not comparable to two employees with different responsibilities.
- s73v3r_ 8y ago
  "Nobody is claiming that workers' rights should be limited so that employers can make more money." I mean, no one would come right out and say that, because it's a pretty stupid thing to say. There are, however, plenty of actions that have that outcome, without having the optics of coming right out and saying that you're favoring employers over employees. Being friendly to "job creators" and all that.
prolikewhoa 8y ago
Hacker News is not a place to come to talk about labor, labor rights, or left wing ideas. It's very hostile to non-right wing ideas as most of the people here are working cushy remote & wfh jobs making oodles of money and don't live in any type of labor reality. I voted you up, but people are not very logical about politics & labor rights here.
- sanderjd 8y ago
  > don't live in any type of labor reality If we are living this, it must be some type of reality, right? I mean, if something is the reality for lots of people, you can't just claim it is not a reality. I think it weakens the argument to ignore the kinds of work lots of people are actually doing when discussing this stuff; it needs to be incorporated into the intellectual structure of the philosophy if it is meant to be useful.

jstanley 8y ago

That's a complete strawman. Nobody is claiming that workers' rights should be limited so that employers can make more money. People are claiming that workers' rights should be limited to the same extent that employers' rights are limited (i.e. that either party can end the relationship at any time and without any specific reason) so as to avoid giving excess power to one party or the other.

prolikewhoa 8y ago
Who does all of the work? That's right, the workers. The workers should have the excess of power in all circumstances. The only reason we have weekends and the "40" hour work week is because of workers and left wing movements. Corporations would have never let such happen, and are historically against the worker & only in favor of raking in profit at the expense of labor. Edit: point proven, HN doesn't care about labor rights and prefers rights for corporations over the actual workers who make the corporation.
- twblalock 8y ago
  > Edit: point proven, HN doesn't care about labor rights and prefers rights for corporations over the actual workers who make the corporation. There is plenty of room for disagreement among people who accept that workers should have rights -- for example, what should the rights be, how should those rights be balanced against the rights of management, etc.
  - lovich 8y ago
    There is room for disagreement but there is certainly a strong anti labor sentiment on this board. There's a strong pro labor group as well, but I have seen people on here state outright that unions are inherently immoral and not just that unions as they have turned on in specific situations are bad.
hackbinary 8y ago
The employer inherently has more power than the employee. That is why worker's rights are important.
- adventured 8y ago
  The business belongs to the employer typically, they should have far more power over their own business than an average employee does. Inverting that is crazy. I take a job at your 30 year old business that you've run for your entire adult lifetime, now I have more power over it than you do, all because I took a job = perpetual stagnation ala France.
  - lazyasciiart 8y ago
    Ok, now do "I took a job at a huge multinational that you've worked at for your entire adult lifetime, now I have more power over your job than you do, all because I graduated with a minor in HR last month".
    - bena 8y ago
      And? That's the decision of the person who owns the business. Not yours, and not the HR person's. The person who owns the business has decided that this is the process by which he wants employees vetted because they do not have the time to personally oversee every decision. See, you've actually moved the goalposts here and you may not have realized it.
      - lazyasciiart 8y ago
        I'm not sure if you read the comment I was responding to, but it sounds like if you had, you would agree that it was presenting a totally irrelevant argument.
        bena 8y ago
        No it's not. He was talking about the owner losing power over his own business due to hiring an employee. That is not comparable to two employees with different responsibilities.
s73v3r_ 8y ago
"Nobody is claiming that workers' rights should be limited so that employers can make more money." I mean, no one would come right out and say that, because it's a pretty stupid thing to say. There are, however, plenty of actions that have that outcome, without having the optics of coming right out and saying that you're favoring employers over employees. Being friendly to "job creators" and all that.

prolikewhoa 8y ago

Hacker News is not a place to come to talk about labor, labor rights, or left wing ideas. It's very hostile to non-right wing ideas as most of the people here are working cushy remote & wfh jobs making oodles of money and don't live in any type of labor reality. I voted you up, but people are not very logical about politics & labor rights here.

sanderjd 8y ago
> don't live in any type of labor reality If we are living this, it must be some type of reality, right? I mean, if something is the reality for lots of people, you can't just claim it is not a reality. I think it weakens the argument to ignore the kinds of work lots of people are actually doing when discussing this stuff; it needs to be incorporated into the intellectual structure of the philosophy if it is meant to be useful.