5 ms·

The strike has been big news here in Michigan. It's generally seen as a huge victory for the union. With over time the average cereal worker makes $120,000 a

by rmason 5y ago

The strike has been big news here in Michigan. It's generally seen as a huge victory for the union. With over time the average cereal worker makes $120,000 a year. The union has encouraged workers to vote yes on the latest offer. But opponents brought in Senator Bernie Sanders for a big rally to encourage a no vote and it looks like they were unsuccessful. It also doesn't just effect cereal. I'm a fan of Jimmy Dean breakfast bowls that have been extremely hard to find. Turns out they're owned by Kellogg's now and were a part of the strike.

runnerup 5y ago
s/effect/affect
- kingofpandora 5y ago
  I like finding cases where both effect and affect are interchangeable, as in they create logical sentences but with different meanings. > effect (verb): cause (something) to happen; bring about. "It [the union] doesn't just effect cereal. It also effects Jimmy Dean breakfast bowls." I'll give this one a C-.
  - germinalphrase 5y ago
    More commonly, effect is used as a noun while affect is used as a verb.
    - kingofpandora 5y ago
      That's the challenge.
  - runnerup 5y ago
    I think this definition of 'effect' as a verb has some extra nuance in real usage that isn't entirely captured by the dictionary definition. Generally you'll see it used as "[actor] effects [intangible/ephemeral noun]", rather than "[actor] effects [physical object noun]". "Trees effect oranges." would generally not be considered proper English, despite meeting the dictionary definition. Sometimes it's important to use the most(-ly) correct word, rather than merely a correct word. In both cases, "produce" would work much better: "Trees produce oranges". "It [the union] doesn't just produce cereal. It also produces Jimmy Dean breakfast bowls." produce (verb): make or manufacture from components or raw materials. I agree with the C- though! It's certainly not entirely wrong. And a really fun opportunity to talk about effect as a verb!
mynameishere 5y ago
$120,000 a year No article I've seen on the matter brings this up. These are fantastic jobs, and anytime the media reports the facts on similar cases, ordinary people (ie, people who bust their asses for 12.50/hour) start falling into the "move the factory to Mexico" camp. I'm sure Sanders wanted the whole thing to go up into smoke for his own reasons. In any case, people need to stop paying a 2000 percent markup on porridge.
chrisseaton 5y ago
> the average cereal worker makes $120,000 a year Wow - why aren't workers in lower paid careers like service dropping everything to get these jobs? Why weren't people scabbing to get them during the strike and offering to work for $110k instead?
- msbarnett 5y ago
  They were scabbing. Predictably, quality appeared to go through the floor as a result eg) https://twitter.com/RespectableLaw/status/1472257371510652930 https://twitter.com/RespectableLaw/status/147225737151065293...
  - chrisseaton 5y ago
    Yikes is that people interfering with food again to support the aims of the union? Nasty tactics.
    - WaxProlix 5y ago
      Are you assuming malice where sheer incompetence could be at play?
      - chrisseaton 5y ago
        Doesn't seem to be without precedent? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/14/kelloggs-video-urinating-cereal-rice-krispie-fda-criminal-investigation https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/14/kelloggs-video... I don't think it's ever even remotely acceptable to do this over a workplace dispute. What about you?
      - lotsofpulp 5y ago
        Also assuming a couple images in tweets form a set of representative and trustworthy data.
        WaxProlix 5y ago
a1371 5y ago
I don't see anywhere that Sanders encouraged a no vote. Members have talked about voting no but Sanders speech appears to be commending the strikers only. Not suggesting actions.
monkeybutton 5y ago
I don't understand something. Why do they have to make employees work so much overtime? The allegedly bad working conditions were a common talking point for the strike. Seems like if Kellogg's just hired more workers they wouldn't be paying such a premium in OT, and there'd be less complaints on the workers side as well? And if the response is there's a shortage of workers, why not open another plant elsewhere and move some of the production lines?
- senortumnus 5y ago
  I do not know how much this is contributes but Nebraska has very low unemployment rates (<2% currently). Can be hard to recruit for difficult / manual labor jobs even if it pays well
  - mathattack 5y ago
    If they have to mandate time and a half overtime because they can’t find people, it tells me they aren’t paying enough for their employees or charging enough for Frosted Flakes. (Welcome to inflation)
    - missedthecue 5y ago
      They have time and a half. That's a federal law not a union stipulation. That's why cereal makers are taking in $120k with overtime.
      - lotsofpulp 5y ago
        It is possible for the union to have negotiated more than 1.5x regular payrate for overtime.
      - mathattack 5y ago
        I meant if they have to force overtime, which happens to be at least time and a half, then they aren’t paying enough.
  - 5y ago
dragonwriter 5y ago
> With over time the average cereal worker makes $120,000 a year. Which average, mean or median?
- missedthecue 5y ago
  It doesn't matter. That doesn't include management, and nobody on the cereal line is pulling in $20 million and throwing off the average.
shitloadofbooks 5y ago
Weren't a huge part of the issues around the insane hours per day and days per week required? > according to union workers, 72- to 84-hour work weeks — not a typo — that includes mandated overtime and a point system that dings you if you dare beg off to go watch your son’s Little League game. (Kellogg’s claims its employees only work 52 to 56 hours a week and 90 percent of overtime is voluntary, a claim BCTGM workers hotly dispute.) It's easy to say it's 120k a year, but if they're working 80 hours a week to do that, then it's really only half that number. Even 52 hours a week is bonkers to me. I'd want considerably more tha my standard hourly rate to exceed 38 hours a week as well.
- mathattack 5y ago
  If overtime is at time and a half, 80 hours a week at 120K is closer to 48K base.
  - jimt1234 5y ago
    there's also the time lost - time not spent with family or doing whatever else. that's priceless.
- RJIb8RBYxzAMX9u 5y ago
  > [...] 90 percent of overtime is voluntary It's likely "voluntary" in the same sense that arbitration clauses are "voluntary" in many contracts. That is, you voluntarily agree to arbitration clauses in a contract because those terms are not mandated by statute to be in said contract. They are not voluntary is the sense that they're optional! You absolutely have to agree to those terms as part of the contract. Similarly, voluntary overtime likely just means the overtime itself was not initially stipulated hence by definition it's voluntary, rather than referring to whether agreeing to do overtime is voluntary. Aren't Equivocation Fallacy fun!

by rmason 5y ago

runnerup 5y ago

s/effect/affect

kingofpandora 5y ago
I like finding cases where both effect and affect are interchangeable, as in they create logical sentences but with different meanings. > effect (verb): cause (something) to happen; bring about. "It [the union] doesn't just effect cereal. It also effects Jimmy Dean breakfast bowls." I'll give this one a C-.
- germinalphrase 5y ago
  More commonly, effect is used as a noun while affect is used as a verb.
  - kingofpandora 5y ago
    That's the challenge.
- runnerup 5y ago
  I think this definition of 'effect' as a verb has some extra nuance in real usage that isn't entirely captured by the dictionary definition. Generally you'll see it used as "[actor] effects [intangible/ephemeral noun]", rather than "[actor] effects [physical object noun]". "Trees effect oranges." would generally not be considered proper English, despite meeting the dictionary definition. Sometimes it's important to use the most(-ly) correct word, rather than merely a correct word. In both cases, "produce" would work much better: "Trees produce oranges". "It [the union] doesn't just produce cereal. It also produces Jimmy Dean breakfast bowls." produce (verb): make or manufacture from components or raw materials. I agree with the C- though! It's certainly not entirely wrong. And a really fun opportunity to talk about effect as a verb!

mynameishere 5y ago

$120,000 a year No article I've seen on the matter brings this up. These are fantastic jobs, and anytime the media reports the facts on similar cases, ordinary people (ie, people who bust their asses for 12.50/hour) start falling into the "move the factory to Mexico" camp. I'm sure Sanders wanted the whole thing to go up into smoke for his own reasons. In any case, people need to stop paying a 2000 percent markup on porridge.

chrisseaton 5y ago

> the average cereal worker makes $120,000 a year Wow - why aren't workers in lower paid careers like service dropping everything to get these jobs? Why weren't people scabbing to get them during the strike and offering to work for $110k instead?

msbarnett 5y ago
They were scabbing. Predictably, quality appeared to go through the floor as a result eg) https://twitter.com/RespectableLaw/status/1472257371510652930 https://twitter.com/RespectableLaw/status/147225737151065293...
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  Yikes is that people interfering with food again to support the aims of the union? Nasty tactics.
  - WaxProlix 5y ago
    Are you assuming malice where sheer incompetence could be at play?
    - chrisseaton 5y ago
      Doesn't seem to be without precedent? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/14/kelloggs-video-urinating-cereal-rice-krispie-fda-criminal-investigation https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/14/kelloggs-video... I don't think it's ever even remotely acceptable to do this over a workplace dispute. What about you?
    - lotsofpulp 5y ago
      Also assuming a couple images in tweets form a set of representative and trustworthy data.
      - WaxProlix 5y ago

a1371 5y ago

I don't see anywhere that Sanders encouraged a no vote. Members have talked about voting no but Sanders speech appears to be commending the strikers only. Not suggesting actions.

monkeybutton 5y ago

I don't understand something. Why do they have to make employees work so much overtime? The allegedly bad working conditions were a common talking point for the strike. Seems like if Kellogg's just hired more workers they wouldn't be paying such a premium in OT, and there'd be less complaints on the workers side as well? And if the response is there's a shortage of workers, why not open another plant elsewhere and move some of the production lines?

senortumnus 5y ago
I do not know how much this is contributes but Nebraska has very low unemployment rates (<2% currently). Can be hard to recruit for difficult / manual labor jobs even if it pays well
- mathattack 5y ago
  If they have to mandate time and a half overtime because they can’t find people, it tells me they aren’t paying enough for their employees or charging enough for Frosted Flakes. (Welcome to inflation)
  - missedthecue 5y ago
    They have time and a half. That's a federal law not a union stipulation. That's why cereal makers are taking in $120k with overtime.
    - lotsofpulp 5y ago
      It is possible for the union to have negotiated more than 1.5x regular payrate for overtime.
    - mathattack 5y ago
      I meant if they have to force overtime, which happens to be at least time and a half, then they aren’t paying enough.
- 5y ago

dragonwriter 5y ago

> With over time the average cereal worker makes $120,000 a year. Which average, mean or median?

missedthecue 5y ago
It doesn't matter. That doesn't include management, and nobody on the cereal line is pulling in $20 million and throwing off the average.

shitloadofbooks 5y ago

Weren't a huge part of the issues around the insane hours per day and days per week required? > according to union workers, 72- to 84-hour work weeks — not a typo — that includes mandated overtime and a point system that dings you if you dare beg off to go watch your son’s Little League game. (Kellogg’s claims its employees only work 52 to 56 hours a week and 90 percent of overtime is voluntary, a claim BCTGM workers hotly dispute.) It's easy to say it's 120k a year, but if they're working 80 hours a week to do that, then it's really only half that number. Even 52 hours a week is bonkers to me. I'd want considerably more tha my standard hourly rate to exceed 38 hours a week as well.

mathattack 5y ago
If overtime is at time and a half, 80 hours a week at 120K is closer to 48K base.
- jimt1234 5y ago
  there's also the time lost - time not spent with family or doing whatever else. that's priceless.
RJIb8RBYxzAMX9u 5y ago
> [...] 90 percent of overtime is voluntary It's likely "voluntary" in the same sense that arbitration clauses are "voluntary" in many contracts. That is, you voluntarily agree to arbitration clauses in a contract because those terms are not mandated by statute to be in said contract. They are not voluntary is the sense that they're optional! You absolutely have to agree to those terms as part of the contract. Similarly, voluntary overtime likely just means the overtime itself was not initially stipulated hence by definition it's voluntary, rather than referring to whether agreeing to do overtime is voluntary. Aren't Equivocation Fallacy fun!