3 ms·

so adjusted for currency alone the lowest paid stevadore in Australia earns almost as much as the highest paid one in the US and five times more than the lowest

so adjusted for currency alone the lowest paid stevadore in Australia earns almost as much as the highest paid one in the US and five times more than the lowest paid one. to put this into perspective, australian stevedore gets paid as much as a mid-level senior developer in australia. australian economy very much depends on its ports. if these workers go on strike guess what happens to the rest of the economy. unions in this situation are then in a good position to argue for good rewards for their workers via collective bargaining. i dont think they would get anywhere near as much if salaries were negotiated on an individual basis

roenxi 4y ago
> so adjusted for currency alone the lowest paid stevadore in Australia earns almost as much as the highest paid one in the US and five times more than the lowest paid one. to put this into perspective, australian stevedore gets paid as much as a mid-level senior developer in australia. That isn't raising alarm bells for you that you've made an error in your reasoning? If strikes resulted in a 5x salary bump we'd see a lot of smart high-achievers striking. It is more likely you are comparing different categories that happen to be labelled the same here. 5x earning bumps for manual labour is more than hardball negotiating can achieve.
- medo-bear 4y ago
  i think its a valid example of effective union negotiation in a high income bracket > if strikes resulted in a 5x salary bump we'd see a lot of smart high-achievers striking it depends doesn't it? as with everything in life you can always overplay your hand. people might be too scared to strike for various reasons. in some scenarios it might not even be wise to strike. in some scenarios you can even bring down a whole government (see WorkChoices)
  - roenxi 4y ago
    No, it doesn't depend. The idea that there is that sort of salary boost waiting for a large number of people if only they'd stop working/argue really hard is not remotely on the table. The system doesn't have that sort of slack in it, people are realistically not even arguing about a 2x salary bump. There is something in this situation that you've misjudged, it doesn't pass the this-might-be-remotely-feasible test. I've seen sites where the employee truck drivers were allegedly all paid $150k plus. The stat was misleading because there was also a large number of contractors paid in the $50-100k range who weren't official employees. The Australian figure is probably picking up some effect like that.
    - 8note 4y ago
      You are also arguing that there is enough slack for a 2x bump for everyone, if only they switched strategies
      - roenxi 4y ago
        There are much bigger than 2x opportunities for people who switch strategies. The Chinese have more than 10x-ed in my life time. But they didn't do it by work less and fighting more, they did it by working very hard and maintaining peace at outrageous cost. People who've used industrial action as a tactic haven't managed anywhere near the same gains.
    - medo-bear 4y ago
      do you really think that ratio of revenue to payroll is that low? i think you have a very rosy view of how the business world works

roenxi 4y ago

> so adjusted for currency alone the lowest paid stevadore in Australia earns almost as much as the highest paid one in the US and five times more than the lowest paid one. to put this into perspective, australian stevedore gets paid as much as a mid-level senior developer in australia. That isn't raising alarm bells for you that you've made an error in your reasoning? If strikes resulted in a 5x salary bump we'd see a lot of smart high-achievers striking. It is more likely you are comparing different categories that happen to be labelled the same here. 5x earning bumps for manual labour is more than hardball negotiating can achieve.

medo-bear 4y ago
i think its a valid example of effective union negotiation in a high income bracket > if strikes resulted in a 5x salary bump we'd see a lot of smart high-achievers striking it depends doesn't it? as with everything in life you can always overplay your hand. people might be too scared to strike for various reasons. in some scenarios it might not even be wise to strike. in some scenarios you can even bring down a whole government (see WorkChoices)
- roenxi 4y ago
  No, it doesn't depend. The idea that there is that sort of salary boost waiting for a large number of people if only they'd stop working/argue really hard is not remotely on the table. The system doesn't have that sort of slack in it, people are realistically not even arguing about a 2x salary bump. There is something in this situation that you've misjudged, it doesn't pass the this-might-be-remotely-feasible test. I've seen sites where the employee truck drivers were allegedly all paid $150k plus. The stat was misleading because there was also a large number of contractors paid in the $50-100k range who weren't official employees. The Australian figure is probably picking up some effect like that.
  - 8note 4y ago
    You are also arguing that there is enough slack for a 2x bump for everyone, if only they switched strategies
    - roenxi 4y ago
      There are much bigger than 2x opportunities for people who switch strategies. The Chinese have more than 10x-ed in my life time. But they didn't do it by work less and fighting more, they did it by working very hard and maintaining peace at outrageous cost. People who've used industrial action as a tactic haven't managed anywhere near the same gains.
  - medo-bear 4y ago
    do you really think that ratio of revenue to payroll is that low? i think you have a very rosy view of how the business world works