4 ms·
That’s a very reductionist take on what happened here. I don’t think increased profit is likely to result from these firings. How would it?
by fn-mote 1y ago
That’s a very reductionist take on what happened here. I don’t think increased profit is likely to result from these firings. How would it?
- saubeidl 1y agoProfit = revenue - expenses. Firings reduce expenses, the equation above explains the rest. Of course, that's only in the short term, but that's what exec bonuses are given out on!
- wahnfrieden 1y agoFirings in this case were for union busting. Illegal union busting is profitable - that's why business owners do it. Because it's illegal, they will make up a different excuse for why the workers were fired. They will never admit to illegal union busting. So you should not take their statements as good faith.
- zaptheimpaler 1y agoIt may sound simplistic but its the truth and there are plenty of other examples and history around this - Starbucks recently. 30 employees unionizing may not have any significant impact on their profits, but if they let that union grow it would have a lot more members demanding better working hours or wages over time. A strong union also generally leads to a loss of control by management where they have to negotiate more with workers which they don't like. Why do you think they were fired?