- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Elon Musk has decried a wave of “insane” strikes focused on Tesla workshops in Sweden, as workers target the US electric car manufacturer in a strike calling for collective bargaining rights.
In what has been portrayed as the largest fight in decades to save Sweden’s union model from global labour practices, the powerful trade union IF Metall has been leading a strike across eight Tesla workplaces in Sweden for five weeks.
It is the first time workers for the US carmaker have gone on strike and on Thursday, Musk, the tech billionaire and chief executive of Tesla, made his feelings clear, writing on X, formerly Twitter: “This is insane.”
Sure, I guess.
Eating vegetables is good too - rotten vegetables are bad to eat though.
Unions consisting entirely of Vampires and other human-flesh/blood consuming monsters of myth and legend are also bad.
Because of the murders and the consuming of human flesh and blood.
You forgot to mention also the mess that needs to be cleaned up.
Remember how the railroad workers trid to strike & congress shut them down? Unions in America are not like Unions in Europe.
I’ll put my response aside and ask - What’s your point? Don’t unionise?
Wildcat unions > corporatist unions
I don’t have a strong opinion one way or the other (though I think your binary framing of wildcat Vs corporatist is a little dishonest), but looking at the current Tesla dispute in Sweden, the effect is massive because it’s a cohesive, multi-sector strike. Seems like that’s a pretty effective case of “us” controlling “them”, no?
Yeah that the point the Swedish unions aren’t working in a framework that’s designed to give the political establishment control over the unions. If our ability to legally protest political matters could be vetoed by the people in power what effect do you think it would have on likelihood of effecting change through protect?
That’s not a wildcat union, and those strikes were backed by Swedish courts - while I don’t strongly disagree with your point (it varies based on the applicable legislative landscape for one), this example proves the opposite of your point if anything.
Your binary framing is bad enough that it’s working against you, and your comprehension of the terms you’re using doesn’t help. Your underlying ideas aren’t terrible, but they are lacking nuance (see the binary framing) that means they only work in certain contexts such as a hostile legislative environment - not real world examples like Sweden.
Yes, I know what a wildcat union is and yes, that’s what I’m saying. That’s nice that the courts in Sweden have graciously given permission for unions to be unions but that’s not the situation in the US, the unions are at the whims of the political establishment in DC who through the two parts have a strangle hold on the electoral system. I don’t see the democrats giving up those power anytime soon.
There’s definitely benefit to working within the law when you’re able - it allows for things like hyper-effective multi-sector strikes that wouldn’t otherwise happen (see Sweden). That said, under different circumstances, illegal strikes are necessary to get the job done.
Biden breaking the rail strike was terrible, but a product of the circumstances at that point - since then, he’s made some surprisingly big pro-union moves that will almost certainly increase union membership and bear fruit down the road.
The government is the bit that is different. The union is the same. They were just threatened more effectively.