You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
59 points

I thought the whole point of paying you union dues was that when a strike happens, the union covers a portion of your salary like unemployment.

permalink
report
reply
39 points

It’s not an unlimited fund, which is why the UAW strike isn’t at every single plant for example. Policies like this would greatly strengthen unions by allowing much longer and more widespread strikes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Which is where Newsome’s line is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

Strike pay is only $500 a week plus insurance coverage. It’s hard to live on that when strikes can last 6 months or even a year

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

What kind of strikes last 6 months to a year???

99% of strikes last much, much less. No manufacturer in the world can last 6 months without workers. No software company can last 6 months without workers. No fast food company lasts 6 months without workers. No train, bus or airplane company lasts 6 months without workers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Small ones that you don’t hear about. Locals with less than 200 members wind up striking much longer because they’re less threatening. The longest strike in US history was 11 years. Strikes can last longer than you might think. The company just hires scabs. A couple years ago, 200 miners were on strike for 1029 days under the United Steelworkers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

Playing devil’s advocate but what would be the point in working if you got paid similarly by just striking? A worker’s strike is a gamble and always has been. In this instance the workers do not have the upper hand because demand for domestic made vehicles has plummeted and automation is nearly capable of replacing the workers.

Another thing I don’t understand is this isn’t unemployment. This is chosen by the worker and the union and so it’s not unemployment but refusal to work.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points
*

The other side of the argument is how can you get away with exploiting your workers if they have the option of striking comfortably?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

I understand that. But a strike isn’t them being forced to stop working by their employer. It isn’t like being laid off. They chose to stop working when the alternative is to work and get paid.

You don’t get employment insurance when you voluntarily quit a job.

If they want a bigger strike pay, they need to either contribute more or join a bigger union that has the financial means to support them thanks to higher number of participants.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Maybe I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure UAW is the best paying strike pay in the US. It’s also the 6th biggest union. The point is that the company has a much bigger advantage for surviving a strike than workers do. Getting unemployment would help level the playing field.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

What you claim is your position. Some agree. Others don’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply

That’s what Teamsters does. No idea what’s going on here.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!worldnews@lemmy.ml

Create post

News from around the world!

Rules:

  • Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc

  • No NSFW content

  • No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc

Community stats

  • 4.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 122K

    Comments