4 ms·

How is this special? The whole point of a strike is to stop working as a risky bartering chip. Why would they expect to get paid whilst not working?

by koolba 4y ago

powera 4y ago
Because many unions are coddled, and feel "not getting paid while not working" is an unreasonable and illegal action by their employer?
- powera 4y ago
  I'm getting downvoted for this comment, and I must confess this whole thread is off-topic. But: there are a lot of unions that don't seem to understand that starting a strike is starting a fight. Their only response to somebody fighting back is whining to the press. Which might work once, but in the medium-term is certain to lead to massive defeats for the labor movement.
haney 4y ago
I thought the same thing. Are there examples of companies that paid workers while they're striking? Do I just not know how strikes normally work?
crazygringo 4y ago
Yup this is non-news. Nobody ever gets paid during a strike. At best, there may a union fund reserved for paying workers to some degree during a strike. But that's always funded by the union. It's not the employer paying. "Extraordinarily hostile" makes sense in no universe.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > Yup this is non-news. Nobody ever gets paid during a strike. Sounds like these people were paid while striking, for a few weeks: > Nearly 1,800 part-time faculty members at the New School, who have been on strike since November 16 for better pay and working conditions, remained out of work and on the picket lines on Wednesday even as the university said it would start withholding their pay [emphasis mine].
  - crazygringo 4y ago
    I mean, with salaried employees who work relatively independently (as opposed to clocking in on a factory floor), it's genuinely going to take a couple of weeks to even figure out a process for determining who's striking and how to take them off of payroll (which often has to be submitted a couple of weeks in advance). I wouldn't assume they were paying striking employees because they wanted to be doing so.

How is this special? The whole point of a strike is to stop working as a risky bartering chip. Why would they expect to get paid whilst not working?

by koolba 4y ago

How is this special? The whole point of a strike is to stop working as a risky bartering chip. Why would they expect to get paid whilst not working?

powera 4y ago

Because many unions are coddled, and feel "not getting paid while not working" is an unreasonable and illegal action by their employer?

powera 4y ago
I'm getting downvoted for this comment, and I must confess this whole thread is off-topic. But: there are a lot of unions that don't seem to understand that starting a strike is starting a fight. Their only response to somebody fighting back is whining to the press. Which might work once, but in the medium-term is certain to lead to massive defeats for the labor movement.

haney 4y ago

I thought the same thing. Are there examples of companies that paid workers while they're striking? Do I just not know how strikes normally work?

crazygringo 4y ago

Yup this is non-news. Nobody ever gets paid during a strike. At best, there may a union fund reserved for paying workers to some degree during a strike. But that's always funded by the union. It's not the employer paying. "Extraordinarily hostile" makes sense in no universe.

tablespoon 4y ago
> Yup this is non-news. Nobody ever gets paid during a strike. Sounds like these people were paid while striking, for a few weeks: > Nearly 1,800 part-time faculty members at the New School, who have been on strike since November 16 for better pay and working conditions, remained out of work and on the picket lines on Wednesday even as the university said it would start withholding their pay [emphasis mine].
- crazygringo 4y ago
  I mean, with salaried employees who work relatively independently (as opposed to clocking in on a factory floor), it's genuinely going to take a couple of weeks to even figure out a process for determining who's striking and how to take them off of payroll (which often has to be submitted a couple of weeks in advance). I wouldn't assume they were paying striking employees because they wanted to be doing so.