4 ms·
> their employer and new employees who need a job enough that they are willing to work for less money or worse conditions. What if I want to work for my employ
by bko 2y ago
> their employer and new employees who need a job enough that they are willing to work for less money or worse conditions.
What if I want to work for my employer but only for more money? Suppose I'm a rockstar and my employer agrees, but their hands are tied because they can't pay me more and have to instead pay off the pension funds of people that retired a decade ago and older employees
- TuringNYC 2y ago>> What if I want to work for my employer but only for more money? Suppose I'm a rockstar and my employer agrees, but their hands are tied because they can't pay me more and have to instead pay off the pension funds of people that retired a decade ago and older employees Eventually situations like this bankrupt a company, sadly due to decisions made decades ago. Just because a company's hands are tied does not mean that current employees need to take sub-market wages. They can, if they are being compensated in some other way (unique experience, growth potential, etc) but normally people see the writing on the wall and walk away. Also, company management needs to negotiate contracts which are fair to all three parties -- owners, current union members, future employees who will bear the burden. It is a tough but important balancing act.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- closeparen 2y agoUnions exist to redistribute income. From capital to labor, and from workers with higher market wages to those with lower market wages. That management can't award an outsized pay package to a valuable employee without buying everyone else's assent is a feature - that's why people with left-leaning economic politics like them.