4 ms·

I worked in a warehouse for a summer in school because the hours fit around my other job and the pay was little higher than some other options (retail). But the

by apercu 8y ago

I worked in a warehouse for a summer in school because the hours fit around my other job and the pay was little higher than some other options (retail). But the Teamsters union ran the show and it was so political that I went back to the food/beverage service business. All that said, it's too bad that warehouse work isn't going to be an option for many people. There are fewer and fewer jobs for a lot of people. Note: I support Unions and wish we had more. That union, however....

saas_sam 8y ago
Just curious but why do you think other unions are better than the one you had experience with? (Not looking to argue just genuinely curious in your perspective, thanks.)
mjevans 8y ago
It would be better for all if there were enough unions for a choice to be had there, and if negotiations were across all unions and businesses 'in a sector' at a time. This way there isn't a dramatic power imbalance... * Big corp VS single worker * Monopoly on labor (Union required) VS single corp * Monopoly on type of job (Union required) VS single worker That gives a choice at every possible side, and also gives the worker the option of switching unions if the political leadership of one is poor or they have bad support/promotion. It also gives sets of businesses and sets of worker pools the opportunity to reach the most amicable agreement for the compensation and treatment of works as possible. This does nothing to reflect larger economic imbalances caused by things like minimum wage, but it could slow or reverse the deterioration of the middle class and increase stability of workers within an area which would promote more investment in having a community there and fixing things like insane housing costs.
briandear 8y ago
> That union, however.... Exactly. All unions become "that union" when given enough power and influence.
- lexs 8y ago
  That's a gross generalisation and I would strongly disagree, this boogeyman of the evil union gets trotted out every time in tech forums like hackernews.

by apercu 8y ago

saas_sam 8y ago

Just curious but why do you think other unions are better than the one you had experience with? (Not looking to argue just genuinely curious in your perspective, thanks.)

mjevans 8y ago

It would be better for all if there were enough unions for a choice to be had there, and if negotiations were across all unions and businesses 'in a sector' at a time. This way there isn't a dramatic power imbalance... * Big corp VS single worker * Monopoly on labor (Union required) VS single corp * Monopoly on type of job (Union required) VS single worker That gives a choice at every possible side, and also gives the worker the option of switching unions if the political leadership of one is poor or they have bad support/promotion. It also gives sets of businesses and sets of worker pools the opportunity to reach the most amicable agreement for the compensation and treatment of works as possible. This does nothing to reflect larger economic imbalances caused by things like minimum wage, but it could slow or reverse the deterioration of the middle class and increase stability of workers within an area which would promote more investment in having a community there and fixing things like insane housing costs.

briandear 8y ago

> That union, however.... Exactly. All unions become "that union" when given enough power and influence.

lexs 8y ago
That's a gross generalisation and I would strongly disagree, this boogeyman of the evil union gets trotted out every time in tech forums like hackernews.