4 ms·
the right to strike, strangely enough. As has been pointed out elsewhere, there is an existing precedent for dealing with strike action: negotiation. There is
by codeduck 3y ago
the right to strike, strangely enough. As has been pointed out elsewhere, there is an existing precedent for dealing with strike action: negotiation. There is also an existing precedent for dealing with companies that use tactics like strike-breaking, and that is systematic shunning. A company in Sweden (and elsehwere) that attempts what Tesla has done here is likely to be boycotted by ALL labour unions - finance, logistics, utilities. It is very difficult to operate when banks will not process your transactions, when calls will not route to your call centers, or when roads to your factory are not cleared by snow plows.
- belltaco 3y agoI already knew that, those precedents you refer to are not legal precedents in law or court cases though. When people say rights they generally refer to legal rights.
- amalter 3y agoThe legal right is for all of Tesla's suppliers, service providers, partners, etc are allowed to "sympathy strike". This effectively exiles the company from doing business in the country. Tesla is not a particularly large employer in Sweden and does not seem to be particularly loved. What they are doing (strikebreaker) is "legal" - but when they are removed from market by the sympathetic population, it will be an obvious outcome. The surprise is that normally logical employers do not work this way in these countries. However, we've seen that emotional responses are often how Musk's companies operate. I expect it to end poorly for him in this case. Sweden is not a large market, but events like this contribute to Tesla's reputational decline. The Nordic countries were some of the first and fastest to embrace Tesla. But a brand can be ruined faster than it can be built.