7 ms·

That's a bad comparison because the power dynamics are wildly different. To quote another commenter: > Employees can’t 1/35,000th quit the way Starbucks can c

That's a bad comparison because the power dynamics are wildly different. To quote another commenter: > Employees can’t 1/35,000th quit the way Starbucks can close 1/35,000th of its locations. https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=34997971 https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=34997971

gruez 4y ago
So "retaliation" is just the word for when the party with more power terminates an agreement?
- aaomidi 4y ago
  No it’s a word that the a party terminates an agreement because of workplace organization. I think the problem here is that property owners both want government protection but they specifically hate it when it doesn’t help them. If we don’t want the government interjecting itself into “contracts” then let’s have that. Courts and cops should not be enforcing contracts. People should not be going to prison for breaking contracts. It’s unfair to have it both ways. The government is currently protecting employers against employees - and not really the other way around. So maybe let’s balance government influence in contracts? It’s perfectly fine for the government to force a company to keep a store open because they unionized. In the grand scheme of things these companies still have a huge advantage.
  - gruez 4y ago
    > No it’s a word that the a party terminates an agreement because of workplace organization. Addressed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34999564 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34999564 >I think the problem here is that property owners both want government protection but they specifically hate it when it doesn’t help them. I'm not sure why property owners are being singled out here when the statement is applicable to basically everyone. Who doesn't love free government services but hate taxes?
ihateyouall123 4y ago
I will never understand this concept of power imbalance. You are working because you don't have power, so you rely on others with power to give you power (money in this situation). If the power was even, why would I need to work in the first place?
- jrgoff 4y ago
  I don't think the point is to have equal power between the parties, but that the party with more power should be prevented from wielding that power abusively.
  - kazen44 4y ago
    Also, the reason all of this is regulated into law in most countries is because the alternative is usually violence. People seem to forget labour rights have been won by blood, not some benevolence of companies in a capitalistic society.
- arrosenberg 4y ago
  What don't you understand? Workers want more bargaining power and the only leverage they have is the ability to stop the money hose for Howard Schultz. If they stop his profits for long enough, he will have to accede to their demands in order to make money again.

gruez 4y ago

So "retaliation" is just the word for when the party with more power terminates an agreement?

aaomidi 4y ago
No it’s a word that the a party terminates an agreement because of workplace organization. I think the problem here is that property owners both want government protection but they specifically hate it when it doesn’t help them. If we don’t want the government interjecting itself into “contracts” then let’s have that. Courts and cops should not be enforcing contracts. People should not be going to prison for breaking contracts. It’s unfair to have it both ways. The government is currently protecting employers against employees - and not really the other way around. So maybe let’s balance government influence in contracts? It’s perfectly fine for the government to force a company to keep a store open because they unionized. In the grand scheme of things these companies still have a huge advantage.
- gruez 4y ago
  > No it’s a word that the a party terminates an agreement because of workplace organization. Addressed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34999564 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34999564 >I think the problem here is that property owners both want government protection but they specifically hate it when it doesn’t help them. I'm not sure why property owners are being singled out here when the statement is applicable to basically everyone. Who doesn't love free government services but hate taxes?

ihateyouall123 4y ago

I will never understand this concept of power imbalance. You are working because you don't have power, so you rely on others with power to give you power (money in this situation). If the power was even, why would I need to work in the first place?

jrgoff 4y ago
I don't think the point is to have equal power between the parties, but that the party with more power should be prevented from wielding that power abusively.
- kazen44 4y ago
  Also, the reason all of this is regulated into law in most countries is because the alternative is usually violence. People seem to forget labour rights have been won by blood, not some benevolence of companies in a capitalistic society.
arrosenberg 4y ago
What don't you understand? Workers want more bargaining power and the only leverage they have is the ability to stop the money hose for Howard Schultz. If they stop his profits for long enough, he will have to accede to their demands in order to make money again.