3 ms·
This group—formerly composed of around 49 employees—cited minimal benefits and low pay, as well as a return-to-office order as reasons for both unionisation and
by aurareturn 3y ago
This group—formerly composed of around 49 employees—cited minimal benefits and low pay, as well as a return-to-office order as reasons for both unionisation and strikes in Feburary. "Many workers are forced to work multiple jobs to make ends meet," reads a statement later made by the Union.
Shouldn't they find better jobs then? If everyone in the world wants to blame the employer for why they're low paid, then what? We all give up on getting educated, upskilled, and simply form a union and demand to get paid equally without contributing equally?
I'm not against getting your fair share but they have the ability to find a different job that can satisfy their requirements. They're not held hostage.
Others have commented that their contracts simply expired and they were contractors. I don't want to get into the legal technicalities of it. Rather, I just want to talk about common sense.
- anigbrowl 3y agoYou are right that they could change jobs, but since Google and Youtube are prestigious global brands, future employers are likely to assume those jobs are well-compensated and that if the person left, the fault lies with them for some reason. This too is common sense. Anyway, I see no reason why people shouldn't consolidate their labor power in negotiation just as corporate shareholders consolidate their capital power.