• keeb420
    link
    fedilink
    371 year ago

    Yay. Get bent Howard Shultz. Same for you Jeff bezos. You union busting pos.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          9
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The main issue that this doesn’t deal with is that it in no way stops a company from straight up closing any location that does try to unionize.

          “Oh no, we must recognize your union… and in unrelated news, your location is now closed. Feel free to apply to the new location we’re opening up a block away.”

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            61 year ago

            Sure they could do that, year after year, but they might as well sink that cost into giving the union what it wants after once or twice

            • @bamfic
              link
              English
              71 year ago

              Tell that to Starbucks. Already doing it

              • @JamesFire
                link
                41 year ago

                They can’t do it forever. They’re desperately hoping the union drive will give up soon.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  31 year ago

                  That’s literally why there’s a Starbucks on every corner; they want the option of closing down up to 90% of them to keep away from Unions

          • @JamesFire
            link
            31 year ago

            A) That is union busting

            B) It’s fucking expensive, both in actual costs and lost revenue, to keep doing that. Eventually the company will realize they can’t afford it and stop, or they’ll go bankrupt.

            C) Being forced to recognize the union means you need to negotiate with the union. Which means you need to make a union contract. Which can include language about how closing down locations is handled. Or how opening up new locations is handled. Like, say, they can only hire new union workers. So they can close down 1 location, then they have to hire union anyway at the new location, so what’s the point?

            To be blunt, what you’re describing has exactly 0% chance of working out in the company’s favour over the long term. More than that, it has little chance of even working in the first place. It’s this absurd idea based in nothing.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              51 year ago

              I want to believe you but five decades on this earth remind me that what you say is just pie in the sky

  • keeb420
    link
    fedilink
    211 year ago

    Yay. Get bent Howard Shultz. Same for you Jeff bezos. You union busting pos.

      • @boeman
        link
        71 year ago

        I hope it’s commented again, it can use more up votes.

  • @SendMePhotos
    link
    11 year ago

    Why aren’t retail managers protected for union stuff?

    • @SendMePhotos
      link
      71 year ago

      Nvm I read it. It’s because the managers manage the workers and thus it would be a conflict of interest. The managers are for the company and the workers are the union.

      • @QuarterSwede
        link
        51 year ago

        Good managers are to protect company interests but not at the expense of the workers. Managers should be making employee work lives easier and better. Take care of your employees and everything else takes care of itself. Problem comes in when managers who don’t know how to manage people get involved. You can manage process well and still suck at the human (more important) side of things.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        I’ve heard it said that this is why, sometimes, a lot of people are given the title "manager’ when they’re not really in any sort of managerial positions. It prevents them from entering unions as easily.

        Take that with a grain of salt though.