4 ms·
[citation needed]
by MisterTea 3y ago
[citation needed]
- adastra22 3y agoSeriously? What citation is needed? The unions are why they didn’t switch to a less labor-intensive process. How is that a controversial statement?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- wmeredith 3y agoA comment above yours says that these scrap-processing mini-mills are more labor-intensive to operate, which is why most of them are in China. So... yes, seriously, a citation is needed for your claim.
- MisterTea 3y agoYes seriously. You backed up your answer with nothing.
- greenie_beans 3y agoit's not controversial. you just didn't prove it. you said "yes, absolutely" as if it's universal truth, without any evidence.
- Kon-Peki 3y agoElectric arc furnaces don't necessarily reduce union labor needs. They reduce the amount of energy needed and reduce the carbon emitted and are simpler to operate (yes, fewer people). But the newfound flexibility and utilization that they provide generally increases the number of union laborers the steel mill employs. The IBEW brings union workers in from multiple states and puts them up in temporary housing just to build these things as fast as possible. Everybody wants them, they are just so incredibly expensive at the size that US Steel needs.
- zbyte64 3y agoBecause the Nordic labor market is dominated by unions and is considered highly competitive on the global stage? Or because to believe that propaganda as a "universal truth" it would mean unions are not self-interested entities (unlike businesses and people).