1899
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 293 points 1 week ago

I love how one person cites a statistic, and another person just dismisses it as false because of their anecdotal experience.

[-] slazer2au@lemmy.world 92 points 1 week ago

Sounds like every online platform ever.

[-] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 57 points 1 week ago
[-] _stranger_@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

It was more like False, Source: this paper that says True.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] pdxfed@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

Actually, that's not true at all. This one time, I met a guy who...

[-] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 54 points 1 week ago

This is how most people think and see the world, which is why we (the US) are in the boat we're in now. People don't see the big picture if they never have to or aren't taught how to think critically.

[-] faythofdragons@slrpnk.net 14 points 1 week ago

I think it's a complicated problem. To start with, the studies are usually paywalled. If you can afford to purchase access, you still need the capacity to understand and parse the formal academic language. Most people have neither of those requirements, and have to rely on the media to report the statistics accurately, which doesn't happen.

This leads to a situation where the media keeps trying to say, idk employment statistics are better than ever, and then everybody updates their mental blocklist to filter out the word 'statistics'.

[-] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

Not to mention most issues are extremely nuanced and complex, not something that can be accurately broken down into 5 second sound bits.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] jonne@infosec.pub 16 points 1 week ago

And I've never heard of a contract that explicitly ties non-union workers' pay to the union contact, but I'd be cheering the union guys on if they ever asked for a raise if that was the case.

[-] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 21 points 1 week ago

That's actually more common than you think. It's not explicit.

My niece who works at a very popular coffee shop where some are unioned, the non-union ones get paid a bit extra and reminded on the daily about that benefit of higher pay for being non-unioned.

And my aunt works as a receptionist in a non-union hospital. Her counterparts in a union, when they went on strike and got a huge pay bump... She suddenly "mysteriously" got a pay bump aligned with it because the non-union hospital was afraid of employees unionizing (which secretly, they were).

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

If these people were good at critical thinking, they wouldn't have these stupid fucking opinions to begin with.

[-] kahdbrixk@feddit.org 14 points 1 week ago

My thoughts exactly. And how I love this complete dismissal style with the "False." at the beginning, that has established itself online. it's a perfect giveaway for " now my personal but universal opinion, also called Truth bomb, is going to destroy your statement" - which in my opinion is just extremely patronizing and never really true.

Especially when comparing your personal anecdotal experience with a fucking statistic.

Oh and nobody talks like that in real life, or at least the people that do start their verbal line of argument this way are idiots and everybody knows it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[-] PaupersSerenade@sh.itjust.works 194 points 1 week ago

I live in California, so there was a lot of bemoaning the rising minimum wage.

“Why should someone flipping burgers earn as much as I do in a trade field?”

Mate, you should be arguing for increased wages, not trying to keep others down.

[-] Flames5123@sh.itjust.works 39 points 1 week ago

Seattle metro area has the highest minimum wage in the country. The top 5 cities in the US are all in this metro. This is because when the wage increases were passed by city, they were tied to the inflation rate so that increases every year, so no new laws have to be passed year over year to get this increase. No arguing every year for a simple cost of living adjustment.

[-] Chip_Rat@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

Fucking thank you! Why is this so complicated?? Why fight for $15 or whatever if you know by the time your get the fucking laws past your dollar is worth half as much.

It's so transparently flawed to because tying minimum wage to a formula/basket/col/astrology FFS, Would mean not having to revisit this fight every. Single. Year.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 22 points 1 week ago

Mate, you should be arguing for increased wages, not trying to keep others down.

It’s my opinion that people like this aspire to be their own boss, make their own money, and look up to business owners as mentors.

None of that is inherently wrong, until the mentors/business owners start espousing the evils of increased wages, how paying taxes is preventing pay raises for their workers, etc.

So not knowing any better, these wannabes go out and parrot what they’ve heard their heroes say as if it’s gospel. And of course the talking heads that they listen to say the same shit, further solidifying the class warfare mentality.

[-] x00z@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

Those same people get mad if nobody is flipping burgers for them.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 143 points 1 week ago

Cathy is a dumbass. Don't be like Cathy.

[-] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 74 points 1 week ago

That’s up there with refusing raises to avoid going up a tax bracket.

[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 28 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I will forgive people who were previously had a low enough income to have benefits that magically disappeared completely at a certain threshold when they received a raise for assuming that making too much money could be a negative. They generally never made enough to understand how tax brackets work and assumed the worst.

If it is explained to them and they refuse to learn, that is on them.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] needanke@feddit.org 13 points 1 week ago

Cathy? If I see FirstNameBunchOfNumbers and a twitter checkmark my first assumption would be that its a bot.

[-] pyre@lemmy.world 113 points 1 week ago

"your statistic is false because I have an anecdote" is literally the entire basis of the conservative understanding of science.

union workers don't make more on average because I earn half a dollar more.

global warming isn't happening because I brought a snowball.

vaccines cause death because my friend walked out of a clinic after a shot and got hit by a self driving tesla.

[-] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 22 points 1 week ago

vaccines cause death because my friend walked out of a clinic after a shot and got hit by a self driving tesla.

😂

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] varjen@lemmy.world 108 points 1 week ago

Together we bargain, alone we beg.

[-] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

This needs to be on a fucking t-shirt.

[-] Gloomy@mander.xyz 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Sure. Have your pro Union T-shirt. And what better place to buy it from than

https://www.amazon.com/Union-Workers-Bargain-Collectively-T-Shirt/dp/B08XHYS16W

Speacial offer for Prime Members: Order today and get to watch the first 30 Minutes of Fightclub Ad-free.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 67 points 1 week ago

How is it even legal to have explicitly preferential pay for people not in a union? Is there a limit to that, or can companies just say, "Anyone who joins a union will be paid minimum wage." Ofc with at-will employment they can always just fire you, but like, if you think about it it's pretty fucked up right?

[-] Stern@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago

I wouldn't be surprised if the union has other benefits that more then make up for the 50 cents, e.g. better medical, vacation, or whatever.

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] lime@feddit.nu 16 points 1 week ago

sounds like their pay is based on union rates. that's probably just a company policy for everyone.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 week ago

What I'm saying is that if they can set "$0.50 above union rates" as the company policy for everyone, they can also set "$5 above union rates" as the company policy for everyone and then cut union rates by $5. It's essentially just bribing people to not join a union or penalizing them if they do. It being company policy for everyone is irrelevant.

[-] bstix@feddit.dk 12 points 1 week ago

They can't cut union rates.

load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments (115 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[-] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 63 points 1 week ago

Lol the fact that she even has a contract at all is because of unions.

[-] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 57 points 1 week ago

"Rising waters lifts all ships", Cathy. Ever heard of it?

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

"This is my water! You go float on your own water!"

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] mumblerfish@lemmy.world 52 points 1 week ago

This is what Swedish unions did even more directly. A company hired labour from Latvia I think it was. The union showed up and said that thats all fine, but you have to pay them properly. None of them were members. They picketed the company for the sake of non-members wages. Why? To avoid social dumping down the line.

[-] BullishUtensil@lemmy.world 48 points 1 week ago

There are two schools of thought:

Those who want as good life as possible, and Those who want to have a better life than everyone else, no matter what.

[-] jerkface@lemmy.ca 43 points 1 week ago

This doesn't even need to be in your contract. When union shops get a raise, non-union shops either have to compete, or lose their best labour.

[-] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago

Net income is a small factor. One should compare the total package because the unions are usually way ahead of the non-union.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] slappypantsgo@lemm.ee 21 points 1 week ago

Pretty soon we won’t be able to trust BLS data, which is frightening.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

The BLS data has historically been a method by which capitalists measured and managed labor power as a fungible resource. It has historically been a tool of capital to evaluate the influence of policy on labor, not a tool of labor to pressure capital for concessions.

Not to say the information isn't valuable on its face. But it should be worth recognizing that we are looking at autocannibalization of capital. The people most injured by dismantling the BLS are the people who do the bulk of the hiring, not the people being hired.

[-] auginator@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago

I got higher at position as senior. But It wasn’t until I was able to join the Union that my income doubled. Year before I joined like in 2007 manager gave me a .10 raise. This shit is real.

[-] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 18 points 1 week ago

My company acquired a division that had a great union and we all got more vacation days. Woot!

[-] pinheadednightmare@lemm.ee 14 points 1 week ago

Cathy is a fucking idiot

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
1899 points (100.0% liked)

Work Reform

11448 readers
140 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS