• rockSlayer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    3 months ago

    If you’re one of these folks, consider unionizing. The best time to become an organizer is when you have one foot out the door. If you win, you get a union job. If you’re illegally fired, you get a nice payout and a new job. I’m an experienced union organizer with lots of connections, I’m willing to help folks find resources.

      • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 months ago

        Sure thing! The NLRB is a fantastic source, but only covers national labor rights. You’ll want to look up your state’s department of labor for local labor laws. CODE-CWA is the group I organized with, they specialize in the tech industry and offer free training each weekend; I know several of the top organizers in CODE, you’ll be in good hands. Dr Richard Wolff’s program Democracy@Work is a great general news source with a heavy emphasis on worker power and the broader economy. If there’s anything more specific you’d like, I can definitely provide those too!

        • technomad@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          I appreciate having the reference for the NLRB. The right to discuss wages was a good thing to read and a good thing to remember.

          So, the company I work for is based in multiple states, and I work in multiple states as well. What should I reference in relation to the local labor laws?

          There’s also no unions for this job (yet), and I feel like it might be very difficult to start because of how new/niche it is. I’m questioning if there is even enough people to warrant starting a union, and where to begin with the research. Would a union be able to cover all employees of a certain job type, regardless of which company they work for specifically? If that was the case, then the labor pool would be slightly bigger.

          • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Yes, sharing wages is always a good thing at work! My company has a tradition of an anonymous salary survey, so folks can properly grasp that it’s the company’s fault you aren’t getting enough.

            Your work sounds very unique, but thankfully I’ve been there a few times trying to figure out an appropriate bargaining unit. There aren’t any hard and fast rules or laws on this topic, but it gives us flexibility to decide how big we go. Traveling and working at a national company has some good precedence with the Teamsters and NALC, as long as you have a “home” office that you work at when you aren’t traveling, that should be enough to claim an appropriate unit.

            It’s ok to be first, someone has to be! What you’re referring to, where unions bargain for an industry minimum for all the workers in a particular industry, is known as sectoral bargaining. It exists, but it will take time. You’re taking the first step towards that point, but start just with your workplace. I also understand your concerns about the work being unique and small. Protected concerted activity only takes 2, so there’s always enough people! When it comes to bargaining, you and your coworkers know the work best, which is why you elect a bargaining committee from your coworkers. For the time being before you get too concerned about how bargaining will go, you must win your union first. Even industries with sectoral bargaining still need to organize workplaces to bargain the stuff that isn’t covered by the standardized working conditions.

            I’m open for DMs to continue this if I didn’t cover everything

    • somethingsnappy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      The labor market in general is still massively in favor of workers on the whole. Yes, unionize in place where that makes sense. Jump ship, make more money, and make companies nervous as well.

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      And a new job at a desired position will get you 3x the raise than promotion within to that position.

      HMW did a video on this, which informs why everyone quiet quits that is, doesn’t work beyond their official duties in order to get management to take notice. So instead of putting your heart into your work, you half-ass your work and put your heart into seeking your next job (résumé, calling headhunters, etc.) and hope to to get upward mobility via job changes.

      The companies screwed themselves over, by being too stingy with benefits and promotions, and by seeking to hire experienced workers from without, rather than training them themselves (and saving on onboarding).

  • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    3 months ago

    yeah nobody has gotten a proper raise over last few years so people taking matters into their own hands.

    boomers are huffing their own farts thinking we should just keep working for them few more years while they exit

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      3 months ago

      You’ve got it wrong! Boomers are actually the number one generation currently ENTERING the workforce. I suspect that it’s people who never prepared for retirement taking minimum wage jobs.

      • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        The boomers who are holding wages down are old clowns looting the companies… not the same boomer

        But either way, boomers are net negative for the labour force.

        Do you got some numbers to back your claim that they are re-entering he work force at rate greater than they are exiting?

        How are they out entering gen-z who is graduating college at like 2 millie per year?

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          An article came by a month or so ago but I’m sadly unable to find it. The argument was that boomers left and are now re-entering the workforce at higher numbers than Gen Z is currently doing.

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

            I’m reading Work, Retire, Repeat currently and you’re correct…only they arent so much reentering as not leaving. Many start claiming SS as soon as they can for extra money while they work…only they shoot themselves in the foot by not waiting longer to claim much higher (8%/year) benefits. Waiting until 70 nets you 96%(!) higher benefits. The rich who don’t actually need the extra 8% largely benefit, and because they live longer, collect it for longer. The poor get screwed again, which of course aligns with minorities and women being the most affected.

            This started in the 80s when corporations took advantage of Regan’s policy to shed pensions and instead, ask financially illiterate Joe’s and Janes to manage stock accounts and decide how much they should save. The results were predictable. There have been winners though, corporations (much cheaper 401ks), and financial service industry that sprang up to support pillage uninformed retirees trying to save money to find their retirement for the first time. Regan admin also raised the retirement age to 67 for Social Security in 1983. This represents a permanent 13% decrease in benefits for Americans as it’s 13% less time on average they’ll collect based on mortality rates

            There has been a large media gull-court press to try to make working longer because:

            1. Government knows citizens aren’t saving enough and without pensions can’t manage retirement funds. They are put in power by lobbiests that prevent changes to the 401k structure and repairing social security.

            2. Corporations love older workers; they have fewer options despite the magazine covers showing laughing, healthy retirees on their laptop overlooking their vineyard. In reality they are working physically and mentally taxing jobs no one else will, and this also suppresses wages for younger workers. This is another reason why corporations lobby like hell against national healthcare…TONS of folks would stop working or work much less if they could see a doctor without bankrupting themselves, but can’t until they are eligible for Medicare.

            3. Financial services want that money. Asset management, trade fees, expense ratios, “financial advisors” instead of fiduciaries so much easier to bully folks when they are on their own or in small groups. National programs have buying power and muscles in the marketplace, bad for worthless leeches.

  • anar@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    This is a really, really good news for the employer class. I remember some economists pushing FOR unemployment rate. It lowers the value of your labour.

  • MehBlah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    3 months ago

    NO, no way. Not when all they talk about is no one wants to work. My state boasts 3.4 unemployment. Our maga mouthpiece of a governor wouldn’t lie. /s