It is soo good. A tech company i just got offer from. In their onboarding app, they let me join the union on the first day.

This is what you see in the company with strong union.

  • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    No joke, I see this becoming more common. They’re even doing it the way I imagined: straight up integrated with onboarding.

    Maybe it’s an outspoken prediction, that in the future many more businesses will prefer a unionized workforce, but I think a number of current societal and market vectors would suggest that trend. In particular, consider the variety of HR-related logistics, liabilities, and relational concerns of a modern business that amount to operational overhead. You can likely imagine ways that unions might simplify, stabilize, or fully externalize that friction, such that the increased productivity outweighs higher labor expenses, similar to the way efficiency wages in labor economics can ultimately reduce turnover related expenses. That’s just one way unions could become an attractive solution to employers and employees alike.

    At any rate, it’s what I would prefer if I needed to hire W2s, to the extent that I’d be willing to help spin up local chapters if necessary, and it only takes a handful of successful examples to accelerate labor trends.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      4 months ago

      Unions have long made businesses run better. They don’t fight unionization efforts because of profit. They do it because of control.

      • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Unions help to fight inflation and price gouging as well. Unions are good for the entirety of any economy in which they exist. There are decades upon decades of independent and government funded research that supports this.

        https://theconversation.com/unions-do-hurt-profits-but-not-productivity-and-they-remain-a-bulwark-against-a-widening-wealth-gap-107139

        https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured-stories/labor-unions-and-the-us-economy

        https://www.epi.org/publication/unions-and-well-being/

      • orcrist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        It’s important to remember that “they” is specific people with varying goals. Similarly, merely saying “profit” doesn’t tell us anything about where the money is going.

      • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        At the expense of profit? If control is preferable to operational stability, why do so many businesses use IT vendors?

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 months ago

          They still have a leaver on outside vendors. And yes, power is ultimately their goal. If there’s a conflict between power and profit, they choose power.

          • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            OK just so we’re crystal, I’m only interested in fixing what’s broken. I have no time for doomerism, tedious conspiracies, or despair.

            • frezik@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              What I’m saying is that you can’t go to businesses and say “a union will make this whole place run better for everyone” and expect them to take that for an answer. Unions have to fight. Some of those fights have been bloody.

              That’s not doomerism, tedious conspiracies, or despair. It’s what has happened already in the history of unions.

              • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                Of course, union battles are a matter of history. And yes, today the rational agents of global economies often see unionization as a threat, clearly.

                I argue that it’s only a threat insofar as it’s a disruptive paradigm. On the whole it’s a more fiscally advantageous schema for all but the monolithic “vertically integrated” international corporations that profit largely from self-dealing (and probably need to be broken up anyway).

                You said businesses prioritize “Control” and “Power” over profit — i.e. they are not rational economic agents but despots. It’s a bleak perspective since despots can’t be reasoned with, only overthrown, and moreover it dismisses economic theory entirely.

                I’m just weary of the defeatism. I know we’ve been through a lot and many of us are terribly jaded, but giving up is not an option. I want to win.

                • frezik@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  moreover it dismisses economic theory entirely.

                  Yes.

                  I’m just weary of the defeatism

                  I don’t see it as a defeat. I’m not saying give up. I’m saying know what we’re up against.

    • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Seriously in Europe many investment funds activly go to the unions and ask which problems the company have. They are often better informed and honest then the normal management. They also have an obvious intresst in keeping the company around.

      • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        That is fascinating. It makes a lot of sense. They’re safe to point out when the emperor has no clothes.