• Walt J. Rimmer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sadly, with recent events, all I can think about with this is how Linus Sebastion would go on the WAN Show and say things like, “You don’t need a union unless you have bad management, and I never want my employees to need a union.”

    • bstix@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah that’s a gross misunderstanding of what the purpose of a union is.

      You do want a union even if you have good management.

      A nice management might be able to give you a large salary, flexible worktime, etc.etc. all by themselves, but they’re still going to own you like a lap dog.

      A union can give you the right to negotiate these things, so that you are free from being dependent on the handouts from the very nice management.

      It’s not about taking control of the company or whatever they’re afraid of. It’s about taking control of your own employment and regaining your freedom and rights to have a say in it.

    • SSUPII@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I mean, the phrase is not that bad. If a manager listens to the issues and has the power to solve them and does solve them, I guess someone can argue there is a lower need for one.

      But of course, what if management changes to the worse? Then you are not prepared.

  • superkret@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The only 100% sure way to protect against exploitation of your labor is abstinence.