360
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Dec 2023
360 points (93.5% liked)
politics
18973 readers
3008 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Rapidcreek was attempting to make the case that working class conditions are stable and rising. His points of union gains ignore vast swaths of people's material reality. Unions gaining ground in the past year is a great point, one I am not denying, however those gain are a very small fraction of the already small fraction of unionized workers.
Many of the contracts left many workers out of improvements. The UPS contract won by Teamsters for example was very vocal about how it ended a two tier pay scale system, but in reality it just created a new one for part time workers hired after the contract was signed. That's not to diminish from the gains made, but UPS's current model requires a huge segment of their work force to be part time, as they have high volume rush periods where inbound/outbound needs to be recieved/shipped quickly as their floor space cannot accommodate the volume. Those part time workers are essential so why should they be payed at a lower scale than full time employees? Many of those part time workers aren't as involved in union organizing and Teamsters have done a poor job bringing them into the fold, so when they vault their 85% approval of the contract, they neglect to mention what percentage didn't participate.
That is one example of how many of the gains won aren't what they appear at face value. Mainstream media also does a poor job reporting these nuances in labor fights. So again yes things are improving, but definitely not for everyone and it's not the rosy picture Rapidcreek was trying to paint.