4 ms·

American management is adversarial to unions. American management is adversarial to workers.

by worik 4y ago

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> American management is adversarial to unions Yes, adversarial relationships have this symmetry. > American management is adversarial to workers Strongly disagree. Between tech and finance we have proven models for gains sharing that doesn't require workers and managers be at each others' throats. Many European models similarly have workers aligned with the company's long-term goals and vice versa without a militant union butting heads with sociopathic management. (They're symbiotic.) Meanwhile, American ports are embarrassingly inefficient because the port unions don't want to modernize. These models need refinement. But for many industries, they seem better than inserting a middleman whose existence is reliant on an adversarial relationship between employee and employer.
- couchand 4y ago
  You raise a good point, not every industry has a history of capitalists intentionally harming and killing workers!
- makeitdouble 4y ago
  > Many European models It might depend on the exact country you are thinking about, but I’d assume these models stand on top of solid labor laws and employer obligations that don’t need bargaining in the first place. You don’t need an union if you have a government willing to pass laws benefiting all workers. You’ll see unions where these laws grossly mismatch the extent protections and adjustments are needed (in particular in profession where the employer is the gov itself, teachers for instance…)
- lmm 4y ago
  > Between tech and finance we have proven models for gains sharing that doesn't require workers and managers be at each others' throats. What models are those, and how are they less adversarial than union membership? Compensation negotiations are inherently adverserial, getting fair representation for workers doesn't make them any more so.
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > how are they less adversarial than union membership? Compensation negotiations are inherently adverserial Employees as stockholders, employees having a Board seat (I still think ESOP plans should be required to have this). Profit shares. Yes, pay in the present is adversarial. But there are synergies and opportunities for productivity enhancement modern companies and workers can use to align interests that an industrial line worker could not. (A line worker couldn’t boost the company’s bottom line the way an Apple retail employee can. Counterfactual: an Apple retail employee is less able to jump ship and turbo power a competitor the way tech and finance workers can.)
    - kelnos 4y ago
      > Employees as stockholders I don't think owning 0.000001% of your employer's company is particularly meaningful. > employees having a Board seat That's... vanishingly rare, no? > Profit shares Unusual outside of small businesses, and even then... I agree with the GP that employers are generally adversarial toward workers.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

American management is adversarial to unions. American management is adversarial to workers.

by worik 4y ago

American management is adversarial to unions. American management is adversarial to workers.

> American management is adversarial to unions Yes, adversarial relationships have this symmetry. > American management is adversarial to workers Strongly disagree. Between tech and finance we have proven models for gains sharing that doesn't require workers and managers be at each others' throats. Many European models similarly have workers aligned with the company's long-term goals and vice versa without a militant union butting heads with sociopathic management. (They're symbiotic.) Meanwhile, American ports are embarrassingly inefficient because the port unions don't want to modernize. These models need refinement. But for many industries, they seem better than inserting a middleman whose existence is reliant on an adversarial relationship between employee and employer.

couchand 4y ago
You raise a good point, not every industry has a history of capitalists intentionally harming and killing workers!
makeitdouble 4y ago
> Many European models It might depend on the exact country you are thinking about, but I’d assume these models stand on top of solid labor laws and employer obligations that don’t need bargaining in the first place. You don’t need an union if you have a government willing to pass laws benefiting all workers. You’ll see unions where these laws grossly mismatch the extent protections and adjustments are needed (in particular in profession where the employer is the gov itself, teachers for instance…)
lmm 4y ago
> Between tech and finance we have proven models for gains sharing that doesn't require workers and managers be at each others' throats. What models are those, and how are they less adversarial than union membership? Compensation negotiations are inherently adverserial, getting fair representation for workers doesn't make them any more so.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > how are they less adversarial than union membership? Compensation negotiations are inherently adverserial Employees as stockholders, employees having a Board seat (I still think ESOP plans should be required to have this). Profit shares. Yes, pay in the present is adversarial. But there are synergies and opportunities for productivity enhancement modern companies and workers can use to align interests that an industrial line worker could not. (A line worker couldn’t boost the company’s bottom line the way an Apple retail employee can. Counterfactual: an Apple retail employee is less able to jump ship and turbo power a competitor the way tech and finance workers can.)
  - kelnos 4y ago
    > Employees as stockholders I don't think owning 0.000001% of your employer's company is particularly meaningful. > employees having a Board seat That's... vanishingly rare, no? > Profit shares Unusual outside of small businesses, and even then... I agree with the GP that employers are generally adversarial toward workers.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]