• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    247 days ago

    I hadn’t heard that but with more research, you are correct: they had to threaten a strike. I am disappointed to hear that.

    • @Delphia
      link
      English
      197 days ago

      I’m not that disappointed, its the reality of the system we have. Even senior management have to protect their jobs. They resisted just enough to be able to sell to the shareholders “Did you want a strike? Did you want workers picketing? You want those optics?”

      The system we have sucks, thats undeniable. But this is just the process.

      • @PM_Your_Nudes_Please
        link
        English
        37 days ago

        Yup, exactly. C-level is beholden to shareholders, who would pay minimum wage if given the option. Management held out just long enough for the union to start threatening a strike, when then gave justification for the increase. It’s a big dog and pony show, and every person played their part to keep the shareholders placated.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          27 days ago

          C-level is beholden to shareholders, who would pay minimum wage if given the option.

          They’d pay less than that. “Minimum wage” means “I’d pay you less, but I can’t because it’s illegal.” Hell, workers had to fight for weekends, they’d happily take that away and put kids back in factories if they could.