George Takei 
🏳️🌈🖖🏽Stop blaming strikes for economic damage. Strikes are a logical response to overreach and greed from corporations and the wealthy. If there is resulting economic damage, look to those who drove the workers to strike in the first instance.
Fr. Marty@georgetakei isn't economic damage the whole point of a strike?
Judy Olo 🚫⚠️kakistocracy🌊@frmarty @georgetakei
No, it is to show your value to the company. I was/am a union member. We had a strike in the 80s. The last thing on our minds was damaging the company. We just wanted them to pay decent wages and have health care.
No, it is to show your value to the company. I was/am a union member. We had a strike in the 80s. The last thing on our minds was damaging the company. We just wanted them to pay decent wages and have health care.
@JudyOlo @georgetakei Decent wages and health care are damaging to the company economically, by definition. Sadly, that is our system - companies want to pay as little as possible for the means of production. Workers want a fair portion of that production (and in my opinion, are entitled to it). But when negotiations fail, economic damage in the form of a strike occurs. Without economic damage in the form of lost production (sales), what leverage does a strike hold?
@frmarty @georgetakei
Well, sure, eventually everything boils down to money. How else do we live? The idea is that greed should not be the goal. During the strike I was in, the manager of our office brought us donuts every morning on the line. The local management, supervisors, etc were on our side. Obviously, they didn't want to do our jobs-- you know, actual work. Most of them didn't know how. It was the corporate elites who were against us. Greed. The company didn't lose any real money while we were on strike. In fact, they didn't have to pay thousands of salaries. It did cause inconvenience for the customers. A major telecommunications company. Customers continued paying their bills. They finally got tired of the inconvenience. Of course, every situation can be different.
Well, sure, eventually everything boils down to money. How else do we live? The idea is that greed should not be the goal. During the strike I was in, the manager of our office brought us donuts every morning on the line. The local management, supervisors, etc were on our side. Obviously, they didn't want to do our jobs-- you know, actual work. Most of them didn't know how. It was the corporate elites who were against us. Greed. The company didn't lose any real money while we were on strike. In fact, they didn't have to pay thousands of salaries. It did cause inconvenience for the customers. A major telecommunications company. Customers continued paying their bills. They finally got tired of the inconvenience. Of course, every situation can be different.
@JudyOlo @georgetakei Middle management is typically caught in the "middle" (pun intended). They generally understand the discontentment of the workers, and they don't get the "perks" that the senior management gets. It is that customer inconvenience that is the economic damage in this instance. In telcom, though, most companies have a monopoly or near monopoly in a territory, making any real negotiating difficult, since customers don't really have much choice.
@frmarty @georgetakei
Exactly. The company doesn't take a loss. Sorry, call it economic damage. They didn't lose a dime. Customer inconvenience didn't cost a dime. As I said, they saved paying thousands of salaries. The workers, lower management, customers were the ones who suffered. All because top level greed.
Exactly. The company doesn't take a loss. Sorry, call it economic damage. They didn't lose a dime. Customer inconvenience didn't cost a dime. As I said, they saved paying thousands of salaries. The workers, lower management, customers were the ones who suffered. All because top level greed.