3 ms·

Since the unions cooperate together this way, it looks like they can shut down whatever business they want to, especially since they can decide not to deliver p

Since the unions cooperate together this way, it looks like they can shut down whatever business they want to, especially since they can decide not to deliver packages and mail. Why should a union accept a company's terms at all? If you're powerful enough to shut down a business, what's stopping you from getting whatever you want, regardless of whether it's reasonable?

guerrilla 3y ago
> Why should a union accept a company's terms at all? So that people can get paid and produce goods and services for their society, obviously. > If you're powerful enough to shut down a business, what's stopping you from getting whatever you want, regardless of whether it's reasonable? Laws and contracts and as above the need for money and production, again, obviously.
- bitshiftfaced 3y ago
  The sympathy strikers don't risk losing pay, since they strike against someone other than their employer. Laws and contracts don't seem to be preventing the unions from shutting down Tesla's operation. The need for production doesn't seem to be preventing this either.
rsanek 3y ago
you mean, just like companies have it in the US? they also cooperate, to do things like suppress wages or fix prices. what's stopping them from getting whatever they want?
- bitshiftfaced 3y ago
  What the unions are doing in Sweden are apparently legal. The US has laws to protect against the things you're talking about, such as the Sherman Act and FTC oversight.
  - rsanek 3y ago
    My perception is these laws are enforceable only in the most obvious of cases. It seems like you can go right up to the edge -- things like https://www.wired.com/story/silicon-valleys-exclusive-salary-database/ https://www.wired.com/story/silicon-valleys-exclusive-salary... or https://www.propublica.org/article/yieldstar-rent-increase-realpage-rent https://www.propublica.org/article/yieldstar-rent-increase-r... (we'll see on this one) come to mind.

guerrilla 3y ago

> Why should a union accept a company's terms at all? So that people can get paid and produce goods and services for their society, obviously. > If you're powerful enough to shut down a business, what's stopping you from getting whatever you want, regardless of whether it's reasonable? Laws and contracts and as above the need for money and production, again, obviously.

bitshiftfaced 3y ago
The sympathy strikers don't risk losing pay, since they strike against someone other than their employer. Laws and contracts don't seem to be preventing the unions from shutting down Tesla's operation. The need for production doesn't seem to be preventing this either.

rsanek 3y ago

you mean, just like companies have it in the US? they also cooperate, to do things like suppress wages or fix prices. what's stopping them from getting whatever they want?

bitshiftfaced 3y ago
What the unions are doing in Sweden are apparently legal. The US has laws to protect against the things you're talking about, such as the Sherman Act and FTC oversight.
- rsanek 3y ago
  My perception is these laws are enforceable only in the most obvious of cases. It seems like you can go right up to the edge -- things like https://www.wired.com/story/silicon-valleys-exclusive-salary-database/ https://www.wired.com/story/silicon-valleys-exclusive-salary... or https://www.propublica.org/article/yieldstar-rent-increase-realpage-rent https://www.propublica.org/article/yieldstar-rent-increase-r... (we'll see on this one) come to mind.