3 ms·

Yes, and the vast majority of the time, they're called corporations. "Do what we want or we'll fire you" is acceptable. "Give us tax breaks or we'll leave you

Yes, and the vast majority of the time, they're called corporations. "Do what we want or we'll fire you" is acceptable. "Give us tax breaks or we'll leave you" is acceptable. But somehow "Value your employees or we won't work with you" is a bad thing. Why should collective groups have less power than corporations? We have grown accustomed in America to treating corporations as something between groups of people and actual governments. They aren't. They're groups of people tied together by money and in that respect they're no different than a coalition of workers who have decided that there are requirements to be met in order to do business.

JoeAltmaier 5y ago
One-on-one seems reasonable, that's negotiating with an employer. But when you bring in 'vinny and his friends' to put pressure on one side, that gets iffy. Escalating the negotiation to extortion through back doors, is probably not the optimal way to go.
- MisterBastahrd 5y ago
  When you stop pretending that employee vs. employer is a one-on-one negotiation, then we can begin having an adult conversation. Until then, I'm going to assume that you're being purposefully obtuse due to the hyperbolic nature of your posts in this thread.
  - JoeAltmaier 5y ago
    A corporation is run by people. They're 'negotiating' with hundreds or thousands of people. I'm not sure where you're going with that. The idea is, it's not really negotiation when you turn off their water or shut down their loading dock. That has nothing to do with negotiation. That seems very clear, and not hyperbolic at all. I don't think I've been extreme, but I do know we disagree on what extremes should be 'cricket' and which are over the line. The strong signal I get from this thread is, labor should be allowed any and all tactics because 'labor is good'. That's just not true, fair or rational.
    - MisterBastahrd 5y ago
      'vinny and his friends' "We have mobs in the US that operate like that." You wanna bring any more ethnic stereotypes in the conversation, or you good? As it is, all you've proven in this entire thread is that you're willing to throw around racist innuendo and you have a serious inability to understand basic written English. This is how I described corporations in this VERY thread, replying to you: > "They're groups of people tied together by money and in that respect they're no different than a coalition of workers who have decided that there are requirements to be met in order to do business." Corporations only negotiate with hundreds or thousands of people at a time when they're cutting sweetheart deals with the government or negotiating contracts with unions. They do NOT have that relationship with individual employees. I don't get to bring my entire department into the office with me whenever I'm negotiating a raise with my boss as an at-will employee. At-will employment is funny as hell in its own right, since it perfectly describes the relationships between corporations and non-union employees in the US. We are expected to give our employers at least 2 weeks notice to prepare for our departures, but then turn around and justify their actions for immediately terminating employees for any reason as "protecting the business." You seem to be very upset that McDonald's couldn't just waltz into a foreign market, ignore the prevailing social contract between employees and employers, and do whatever the hell it wanted and damn their employees. The people in Denmark essentially said "we're not going to allow you to come in and start a race to the bottom. We have social business norms here that you need to respect. You will pay these people what others in this industry are already getting, or we will refuse to service you." You would know this if you actually read the article instead of wasting your time dreaming up mafia quips.

JoeAltmaier 5y ago

One-on-one seems reasonable, that's negotiating with an employer. But when you bring in 'vinny and his friends' to put pressure on one side, that gets iffy. Escalating the negotiation to extortion through back doors, is probably not the optimal way to go.

MisterBastahrd 5y ago
When you stop pretending that employee vs. employer is a one-on-one negotiation, then we can begin having an adult conversation. Until then, I'm going to assume that you're being purposefully obtuse due to the hyperbolic nature of your posts in this thread.
- JoeAltmaier 5y ago
  A corporation is run by people. They're 'negotiating' with hundreds or thousands of people. I'm not sure where you're going with that. The idea is, it's not really negotiation when you turn off their water or shut down their loading dock. That has nothing to do with negotiation. That seems very clear, and not hyperbolic at all. I don't think I've been extreme, but I do know we disagree on what extremes should be 'cricket' and which are over the line. The strong signal I get from this thread is, labor should be allowed any and all tactics because 'labor is good'. That's just not true, fair or rational.
  - MisterBastahrd 5y ago
    'vinny and his friends' "We have mobs in the US that operate like that." You wanna bring any more ethnic stereotypes in the conversation, or you good? As it is, all you've proven in this entire thread is that you're willing to throw around racist innuendo and you have a serious inability to understand basic written English. This is how I described corporations in this VERY thread, replying to you: > "They're groups of people tied together by money and in that respect they're no different than a coalition of workers who have decided that there are requirements to be met in order to do business." Corporations only negotiate with hundreds or thousands of people at a time when they're cutting sweetheart deals with the government or negotiating contracts with unions. They do NOT have that relationship with individual employees. I don't get to bring my entire department into the office with me whenever I'm negotiating a raise with my boss as an at-will employee. At-will employment is funny as hell in its own right, since it perfectly describes the relationships between corporations and non-union employees in the US. We are expected to give our employers at least 2 weeks notice to prepare for our departures, but then turn around and justify their actions for immediately terminating employees for any reason as "protecting the business." You seem to be very upset that McDonald's couldn't just waltz into a foreign market, ignore the prevailing social contract between employees and employers, and do whatever the hell it wanted and damn their employees. The people in Denmark essentially said "we're not going to allow you to come in and start a race to the bottom. We have social business norms here that you need to respect. You will pay these people what others in this industry are already getting, or we will refuse to service you." You would know this if you actually read the article instead of wasting your time dreaming up mafia quips.