5,800 Workers Voting to Unionize Their Amazon Facility

[Elegiac]

Are you so sure it's not the other way around, too? Those big armies aren't stopping these corporations from amassing their own feudal forces and ACTUALLY forcefully subjugating the weak as actual slaves?

The idea is no one has that type of "tool" in their tool box. It's literally an illegal form of play.

Nice idea, doesn't work in reality. I am once again asking you to actually read Weber.

[BeepBoo]

Okay, but assuming nobody besides you cares about your opinion - how's that remotely connected to reality?

And assuming no one cares about the opinions of all those weak people and they'd be fine going on living without them, how is your/their view remotely connected to reality?

Flat Earth is also "a core belief" for a lot of people, doesn't mean we need to regard it as anything but bullshit. Rofl.

Trying to equate a moral view with a verifiably false universality/fact is cute. One has infinite possibilities and no "best". The other has only one actual state of reality that necessarily exists for all in the same capacity.

- - - Updated - - -

Nice idea, doesn't work in reality. I am once again asking you to actually read Weber.

Seems to be working just fine. People dying or suffering as a result of preventable stuff isn't the atrocity you make it out to be.

[Elegiac]

And assuming no one cares about the opinions of all those weak people and they'd be fine going on living without them, how is your/their view remotely connected to reality?

Non sequitur.

I'm pointing out that you stating "X is bad" and then saying "it's my opinion" when asked to prove it is kinda cringe.

Trying to equate a moral view with a verifiably false universality/fact is cute. One has infinite possibilities and no "best". The other has only one actual state of reality that necessarily exists for all in the same capacity.

Except... we can actually verify the impacts of workplace regulations and unionization.

You just *want* to try and elevate it to an ethical abstraction so you can treat it as a thought experiment - i.e. don't have to provide evidence to back up your silly assertions, lol.

- - - Updated - - -

People dying or suffering as a result of preventable stuff isn't the atrocity you make it out to be.

The way you feel the need to come into every thread and repeat "I don't care about other people" really just broadcasts a deep set of insecurities surrounding that belief that you feel the need to keep publicly repeating it to strangers seeking validation. Maybe check that.

[Theodarzna]

Are you so sure it's not the other way around, too? Those big armies aren't stopping these corporations from amassing their own feudal forces and ACTUALLY forcefully subjugating the weak as actual slaves?

The idea is no one has that type of "tool" in their tool box. It's literally an illegal form of play.

Well, in the past, a Lord had to actually keep and placate the community around them. You know, at some point a knight takes their armor off, and has to sleep.

The idea that the State should exist purely for Capital and protecting Capital from the consequences of exploitation is IMHO ridiculous.

[BeepBoo]

I'm pointing out that you stating "X is bad" and then saying "it's my opinion" when asked to prove it is kinda cringe.

Entirely not. There is no proving what someone thinks is bad or good, just like there's no proving someone's opinion that one color is better than another.

Except... we can actually verify the impacts of workplace regulations and unionization.

You'd have to be able to say that everyone cares about what those impacts are to say it's "better" or not.

The way you feel the need to come into every thread and repeat "I don't care about other people" really just broadcasts a deep set of insecurities surrounding that belief that you feel the need to keep publicly repeating it to strangers seeking validation. Maybe check that.

The way you constantly feel the need to always push ethical discussions to the same point where I feel the need to say these things is why I do it (because lets be real, all of these topics stem from the same place: the fact that you want to obligate people to care for and about other people).

[Elegiac]

Entirely not. There is no proving what someone thinks is bad or good, just like there's no proving someone's opinion that one color is better than another.

Yeah, no. Once again - trying to elevate it into an abstract realm so you can weasel out of having to back up your assertions will continue to be lazy and dishonest. Rofl. The only person pushing discussions to the same point is the person who jumps into every thread with the same daily reminder that sociopathy - sorry, liberty - is good actually with all the same sort of 'gotcha' energy as asking people to prove that the sun will rise tomorrow.

If you want to state blatantly inhumane political positions and not have them challenged, Gab is that way.

[BeepBoo]

Yeah, no. Once again - trying to elevate it into an abstract realm so you can weasel out of having to back up your assertions will continue to be lazy and dishonest. Rofl. The only person pushing discussions to the same point is the person who jumps into every thread with the same daily reminder that sociopathy - sorry, liberty - is good actually with all the same sort of 'gotcha' energy as asking people to prove that the sun will rise tomorrow.

The fact that you keep trying to force something that is innately and obviously opinionated into some territory like fact is the issue here, not my recognition of the actual reality of thoughts, facts, and opinions.

Moral relativism is the actual state of reality. Sorry hun.

[Elegiac]

Moral relativism is the actual state of reality. Sorry hun.

That has fuck all to do with y'all embracing ideological positions that are internally inconsistent like "coercion is bad because reasons" and "at will employment in a system where destitution is the result of unemployment is good, actually" though, lol. Especially when those inconsistencies just happen to always favor a particular demographic group or social class.

I hate to agree with Theo, but the SovCit bullshit really is just a function of people who are attached at the hip to the status quo embracing a position of political arson in order to prevent any change, even if preventing that change ends up destroying the status quo anyway.

[Shadowferal]

K, but that's not the issue we're talking about here right? I didn't say I'm fine with everything big businesses do.

The bargaining table between an individual and multinational billion dollar conglomerate isn't on equal footing.

[Milchshake]

PRO Act passes House. U.S. House voted 225-206 to pass a union-backed bill proponents call the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act that would modify federal labor laws.

Excited to see what parts Senate can put into a reconciliation bill.

https://www.npr.org/2021/03/09/97525...nizing-efforts
House Democrats have approved a bill that would provide protections for workers trying to organize, a measure that is the labor movement's single biggest legislative priority in this Congress.

[breadisfunny]

Boomers who saw a constant increase in wage for their low skilled jobs during a boom can't understand today's issues.

Anyone not working under an union is a fool in my opinion. Especially when they are nation wide organized.

our former governor scott walker passed a bunch of anti union laws that basically makes it impossible to unionize in wisconsin. but then again it's clear you have no clue about how hard it has been made to form unions in the states.

[SirBeef]

Boomers who saw a constant increase in wage for their low skilled jobs during a boom can't understand today's issues.

Anyone not working under an union is a fool in my opinion. Especially when they are nation wide organized.

Do you understand that many states have written laws expressly forbidding unions, forming them, or making it fire-able offenses to even talk about it? So tell me how they are fools when in 2/3rds of the country it's nearly impossible to be in one?

- - - Updated - - -

Unionizing is fine. I'm not advocating for it to not exist. We'd have to go further into the weeds, but ultimately unions shouldn't be allowed to restrict the freedoms of individuals or companies either. Meaning anyone that was fine not being part of the union would be free to stay that way and the company would be free to hire them.

- - - Updated - - -



K, but that's not the issue we're talking about here right? I didn't say I'm fine with everything big businesses do.

And you are also free to work somewhere else. See how easy that is. If you desire to work at a union shop, most likely becasue you heard of the good pay and benefits, that were provided by union bargaining, then you should join the union or look elsewhere. Grifting shouldn't be allowed by non members IMO.

[Elegiac]

Stop following shitty laws, that is how other countries got rid of them.

"Elections will solve it," - is something americans depend on too much. (And then little to nothing gets solved or way too slowly).

Tfw you’re so salty and eager to victim blame the people that didn’t vote for your preferred candidate that you say “just collectively act” while shitting on people calling for collective action just because they aren’t calling for violence. Rofl.

[SirBeef]

Stop following shitty laws, that is how other countries got rid of them.

"Elections will solve it," - is something americans depend on too much. (And then little to nothing gets solved or way too slowly).

Maybe you should just keep out if American policy since you really don't know shit about it and really think just ignoring it with. Hiw do you live being this naive?

[Felya]

Stop following shitty laws, that is how other countries got rid of them.

By going to jail?

"Elections will solve it," - is something americans depend on too much. (And then little to nothing gets solved or way too slowly).

Did someone not get a 1400$ check from their elected official? Too bad...

[Felya]

Most West-European countries did indeed get rid of their ridiculous anti-union and horrible labor laws, by not following them.

No, it’s the organized labor revolts. Not a dude ignoring law... you literally don’t understand anything.

- - - Updated - - -

None of the countries with strong pro-worker / labor laws ever achieved those through elections.

All of them did.

[Shadowferal]

"Horrible labor laws" needs translating.
Over here it could mean "allowing child slave labor."

[Shalcker]

No, it’s the organized labor revolts. Not a dude ignoring law... you literally don’t understand anything.

It's called Civil Disobedience.

You could see example of that in US when local police refused to cooperate with Trump's ICE.

[Felya]

It's called Civil Disobedience.

You could see example of that in US when local police refused to cooperate with Trump's ICE.

Cops have a union... they can do that... lol

[Milchshake]

Cops have a union... they can do that... lol

Good news comrades!

BREAKING: NLRB with new Biden appointees Withdraws Pending Rule Blocking Grad Student Unions

I was shocked the Trump NLRB didn't go after private sector grad student unions earlier. At this point, by 2025 these unions will have a significant history. They may now be semi-permanent, more buffered from Republican attempts to ban them.

Thanks GA voters!