6 ms·

This is obvious to anyone that works. What do we do about it?

dontlaugh 4y ago
The threat of industrial action is a great motivator for employers. Unionising your workplace makes that threat possible.
- jjtheblunt 4y ago
  does that work better than jumping to a preferable employer (assuming such is possible)?
  - photonbeam 4y ago
    Yes, it means they cant pick you off one by one, but have to negotiate against a group that has real leverage
  - everforward 4y ago
    That assumes everyone has that option. There's likely not enough "preferable employer" jobs for everyone to have one in many sectors. There's also a divide between tactics efficient at the individual level and that efficient at a national or global level. E.g. you can tell an individual they should be a doctor/lawyer/engineer/etc and that's good advice, but if everyone does it then who grows food and cleans floors and etc?
- ec2y 4y ago
  You obviously don’t have my sucky union. The idiots let our agreement lapse over the pandemic and can’t their act together for a new one. (I’d suspect they were being union busted but I’m in Australia where unions are normal.)
  - sudosysgen 4y ago
    There are heavy limitations on union industrial action in Australia that make this sort of thing much more likely to happen. It's a tremendously contrived system and as a result Unions often up very chummy to the employer as elements which may be more amenable to confrontation can get frustrated with the immense complexity and difficulty that brings. Any kind of industrial action used for bargaining is almost impossible to get authorized. I'd say the Australian union system is one of the worst in the world, and most Australian unions are structurally busted.
- missedthecue 4y ago
  This is why truckers (unionised) make a lot of money while software devs (nonunionised) scrape by
  - kar5pt 4y ago
    How do you put on pants in the morning?
    - missedthecue 4y ago
      My comment was facetious satire illustrating that productivity increases, not cartels, are the key to rising wages. I'm sorry it was difficult to understand.
      - fuzzfactor 4y ago
        In a place like SV what percentage of truckers have been laid off compared to software people? How many are really increasing productivity in the long run anyway? When you think about it, their own employers must be satisfied with the lower productivity of a smaller staff or they wouldn't be kicking people out. Edit: Not my downvote. Corrective upvote actually.
zokula 4y ago
[dead]
wolongong942 4y ago
Avoid careers that have been devalued to a greater extent by the following: • Women entering the work force • Immigration • Globalization
- x11vnc4life 4y ago
  Very Charlottesville 2017.
somewhereoutth 4y ago
Get involved with local politics. E.g. the internal party selection process for a candidate for a seat in the UK parliament may only involve a few hundred people - if that seat is safe (i.e. practically guaranteed to that party) then those few hundred effectively choose the representative, and so have a large voice in determining policy. (Ironically the one time I was one of the few hundred, our chosen candidate - who was excellent - got beaten by the Greens in an election upset)
- krageon 4y ago
  Politics is all backroom stuff and old boy networks. You may get involved, but to even start influencing a little you will need many years of networking before you can ever get started. And statistically speaking, you are unlikely to succeed. Objectively it is the only advice that makes sense, but viewed from the individual it doesn't really yield any kind of solution.
  - azmodeus 4y ago
    If you organise yourself you can make an impact a group of 50-100 is easy to build and can achieve a lot. Once you build a group it's easier to network as well. This takes a lot of time and effort for 5-10 years. Don't defeat your voice, fight cynicism.
- pmyteh 4y ago
  There is a certain amount of agency in UK parliamentary selections, but the leaderships of both major parties have (for a good while) been keen to limit that. I'm not saying that it's futile -- you'll certainly get a choice of candidates that the leaderships are happy with -- but I'm not sure it's a decent mechanism for achieving change anywhere except at the margins.
SideQuark 4y ago
Don't accept free money during a pandemic? Except that would be bad too..... Govt handouts during the pandemic added significant money without increased production to keep people afloat, which is good short term. The cost of that is inflation medium term. Long term wages rise to offset inflation. This has always been the pattern. Adding money for nothing to the system devalues each piece of money, so inflation is expected. Long term wages for context https://www.visualizingeconomics.com/blog/2008/05/04/average-income-in-the-united-states-1913-2006 https://www.visualizingeconomics.com/blog/2008/05/04/average...
- throwaway5959 4y ago
  I’m so tired of this nonsense. The checks cut, at least in the US, only barely added to peoples bank accounts and were for the most part quickly spent. Just look at excess savings, there was a brief spike and now it’s back lower than ever. Stop spreading this propaganda.
  - adam_arthur 4y ago
    You’re wrong. Excess savings is still elevated far above pre-pandemic trends. https://theovershoot.co/p/americas-excess-household-savings https://theovershoot.co/p/americas-excess-household-savings You’re likely referencing the savings rate, which is a different concept. This measures how much of newly earned income is saved, not how much excess savings somebody has in an absolute sense. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PSAVERT https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PSAVERT Aside from savings, household credit is still below pre-pandemic trends in real terms, just touching the nominal trend recently.
    - throwaway5959 4y ago
      > Americans liquidated more than $1 trillion of “excess” savings in 2022, eliminating more than half of the surplus accumulated since the pandemic began. Sounds like the problem is solving itself then?
      - 4y ago

The threat of industrial action is a great motivator for employers. Unionising your workplace makes that threat possible.

jjtheblunt 4y ago
does that work better than jumping to a preferable employer (assuming such is possible)?
- photonbeam 4y ago
  Yes, it means they cant pick you off one by one, but have to negotiate against a group that has real leverage
- everforward 4y ago
  That assumes everyone has that option. There's likely not enough "preferable employer" jobs for everyone to have one in many sectors. There's also a divide between tactics efficient at the individual level and that efficient at a national or global level. E.g. you can tell an individual they should be a doctor/lawyer/engineer/etc and that's good advice, but if everyone does it then who grows food and cleans floors and etc?
ec2y 4y ago
You obviously don’t have my sucky union. The idiots let our agreement lapse over the pandemic and can’t their act together for a new one. (I’d suspect they were being union busted but I’m in Australia where unions are normal.)
- sudosysgen 4y ago
  There are heavy limitations on union industrial action in Australia that make this sort of thing much more likely to happen. It's a tremendously contrived system and as a result Unions often up very chummy to the employer as elements which may be more amenable to confrontation can get frustrated with the immense complexity and difficulty that brings. Any kind of industrial action used for bargaining is almost impossible to get authorized. I'd say the Australian union system is one of the worst in the world, and most Australian unions are structurally busted.
missedthecue 4y ago
This is why truckers (unionised) make a lot of money while software devs (nonunionised) scrape by
- kar5pt 4y ago
  How do you put on pants in the morning?
  - missedthecue 4y ago
    My comment was facetious satire illustrating that productivity increases, not cartels, are the key to rising wages. I'm sorry it was difficult to understand.
    - fuzzfactor 4y ago
      In a place like SV what percentage of truckers have been laid off compared to software people? How many are really increasing productivity in the long run anyway? When you think about it, their own employers must be satisfied with the lower productivity of a smaller staff or they wouldn't be kicking people out. Edit: Not my downvote. Corrective upvote actually.

zokula 4y ago

[dead]

wolongong942 4y ago

Avoid careers that have been devalued to a greater extent by the following: • Women entering the work force • Immigration • Globalization

x11vnc4life 4y ago
Very Charlottesville 2017.

somewhereoutth 4y ago

Get involved with local politics. E.g. the internal party selection process for a candidate for a seat in the UK parliament may only involve a few hundred people - if that seat is safe (i.e. practically guaranteed to that party) then those few hundred effectively choose the representative, and so have a large voice in determining policy. (Ironically the one time I was one of the few hundred, our chosen candidate - who was excellent - got beaten by the Greens in an election upset)

krageon 4y ago
Politics is all backroom stuff and old boy networks. You may get involved, but to even start influencing a little you will need many years of networking before you can ever get started. And statistically speaking, you are unlikely to succeed. Objectively it is the only advice that makes sense, but viewed from the individual it doesn't really yield any kind of solution.
- azmodeus 4y ago
  If you organise yourself you can make an impact a group of 50-100 is easy to build and can achieve a lot. Once you build a group it's easier to network as well. This takes a lot of time and effort for 5-10 years. Don't defeat your voice, fight cynicism.
pmyteh 4y ago
There is a certain amount of agency in UK parliamentary selections, but the leaderships of both major parties have (for a good while) been keen to limit that. I'm not saying that it's futile -- you'll certainly get a choice of candidates that the leaderships are happy with -- but I'm not sure it's a decent mechanism for achieving change anywhere except at the margins.

SideQuark 4y ago

Don't accept free money during a pandemic? Except that would be bad too..... Govt handouts during the pandemic added significant money without increased production to keep people afloat, which is good short term. The cost of that is inflation medium term. Long term wages rise to offset inflation. This has always been the pattern. Adding money for nothing to the system devalues each piece of money, so inflation is expected. Long term wages for context https://www.visualizingeconomics.com/blog/2008/05/04/average-income-in-the-united-states-1913-2006 https://www.visualizingeconomics.com/blog/2008/05/04/average...

throwaway5959 4y ago
I’m so tired of this nonsense. The checks cut, at least in the US, only barely added to peoples bank accounts and were for the most part quickly spent. Just look at excess savings, there was a brief spike and now it’s back lower than ever. Stop spreading this propaganda.
- adam_arthur 4y ago
  You’re wrong. Excess savings is still elevated far above pre-pandemic trends. https://theovershoot.co/p/americas-excess-household-savings https://theovershoot.co/p/americas-excess-household-savings You’re likely referencing the savings rate, which is a different concept. This measures how much of newly earned income is saved, not how much excess savings somebody has in an absolute sense. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PSAVERT https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PSAVERT Aside from savings, household credit is still below pre-pandemic trends in real terms, just touching the nominal trend recently.
  - throwaway5959 4y ago
    > Americans liquidated more than $1 trillion of “excess” savings in 2022, eliminating more than half of the surplus accumulated since the pandemic began. Sounds like the problem is solving itself then?
    - 4y ago