3 ms·

Doesn't seem that you have the facts, but you're convinced that one side is right.

by unreal37 7y ago

danShumway 7y ago
I'm open to hearing additional facts, but it's difficult for me to imagine what new information could come out that would change this situation. Regardless of whether or not the employees were actually fired for purely performance reasons, multiple workers have come forward and said that they believe the firings were related to union organization. It doesn't really matter what the intentions were, that's going to end up creating a hostile environment between workers and managers. Let's assume for a sec that Kickstarter is completely acting in good faith -- well, there's being right and there's being smart, and the smart choice would have been to recognize that they're in a very volatile situation, and to temporarily hold off on making moves that could be misinterpreted as adversarial by their workforce. Maybe that doesn't sound fair, but it's Kickstarter's job to maintain a functional work environment, not to be fair, and all evidence I've seen suggests that the current work environment is suffering. In regards to other facts -- that Kickstarter won't voluntarily recognize employees decisions until required to through a legal vote, or that Kickstarter is openly campaigning against the union efforts -- again, I'm open to hearing another side to this, but this is first-hand information coming from press releases from Kickstarter itself. Again, you don't have to be pro or anti union to think it's crappy for a company to insert itself into its employees' conversations about bargaining decisions, and then to claim that it won't recognize those decisions because doing so would somehow corrupt the neutrality of the process. I'm not sure what facts could come up in the future that would make that turn into a good faith argument?

3 ms·

Doesn't seem that you have the facts, but you're convinced that one side is right.

by unreal37 7y ago

Doesn't seem that you have the facts, but you're convinced that one side is right.

danShumway 7y ago
I'm open to hearing additional facts, but it's difficult for me to imagine what new information could come out that would change this situation. Regardless of whether or not the employees were actually fired for purely performance reasons, multiple workers have come forward and said that they believe the firings were related to union organization. It doesn't really matter what the intentions were, that's going to end up creating a hostile environment between workers and managers. Let's assume for a sec that Kickstarter is completely acting in good faith -- well, there's being right and there's being smart, and the smart choice would have been to recognize that they're in a very volatile situation, and to temporarily hold off on making moves that could be misinterpreted as adversarial by their workforce. Maybe that doesn't sound fair, but it's Kickstarter's job to maintain a functional work environment, not to be fair, and all evidence I've seen suggests that the current work environment is suffering. In regards to other facts -- that Kickstarter won't voluntarily recognize employees decisions until required to through a legal vote, or that Kickstarter is openly campaigning against the union efforts -- again, I'm open to hearing another side to this, but this is first-hand information coming from press releases from Kickstarter itself. Again, you don't have to be pro or anti union to think it's crappy for a company to insert itself into its employees' conversations about bargaining decisions, and then to claim that it won't recognize those decisions because doing so would somehow corrupt the neutrality of the process. I'm not sure what facts could come up in the future that would make that turn into a good faith argument?