Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by nicoburns on Monday September 18, 2023 @07:49PM
(#37563823)
Having control of money is power. A kind of power that everyone needs, and many workers (who are typically poorer than company leaders) don’t have secure access to.
Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by WalterBright on Monday September 18, 2023 @09:33PM
(#37564662)
Having skills someone with money needs is power, too.
Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by astrange on Monday September 18, 2023 @07:47PM
(#37563800)
> They cannot prevent you from accepting a job at another company.
They can totally do that with a non-compete clause. Just not in California.
Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by sib on Monday September 18, 2023 @08:33PM
(#37564248)
I'm pretty sure that there is no US state where a company can "prevent you from accepting a job at another company."
In some states, and in some circumstances, they may be able to prevent you from accepting a job at a competitive company.
Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by TaylorAlexander on Monday September 18, 2023 @08:41PM
(#37564303)
Clearly a competitive company counts as "another company".
Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by sib on Monday September 18, 2023 @08:47PM
(#37564340)
Yes - but not every other company - so they have not prevented you from working at another company...
Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by TaylorAlexander on Monday September 18, 2023 @09:04PM
(#37564464)
This seems like a bad faith reading of the english sentence here. The phrase "every other company" was not used. Obviously they can depress the value of worker's wages as a whole if they can prevent you from working at the competition - because a worker with a specific skill set will be best utilized at companies which are in the same field, and so generally in competition with one another.
Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by sib on Tuesday September 19, 2023 @12:25PM
(#37572303)
Not within the context of the long list of things that the OP listed companies can't do...
Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by astrange on Monday September 18, 2023 @10:26PM
(#37564966)
Most people with skills are only really capable of working at competing companies.
Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by sib on Tuesday September 19, 2023 @12:28PM
(#37572347)
Really?? I've lived and worked in Massachusetts and Washington, both states with very strong support for non-competes, prior to living in California, and, as a skilled worker (bachelors and masters degrees in computer science, mba, many years experience in tech) I've not had trouble working in many companies that don't compete with each other. And even in companies that do, as long as I wasn't working in directly competitive parts. And I've had collectively hundreds of thousands of colleagues who've also created careers across companies.
Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by astrange on Tuesday September 19, 2023 @02:08PM
(#37573827)
I mean, I'm in California so my employer can't prevent me from taking a competing job, but the contract does cover starting a business in your free time and they definitely seem to think doing anything on a computer competes with them.
Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by edgyquant on Monday September 18, 2023 @08:54PM
(#37564388)
Which means they can prevent you from utilizing the skills you have, forcing you to start from the bottom. How is this not an extremely lopsided power akin to preventing you from working? In general people will keep quiet to keep making the same money to support their family, etc
Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by TaylorAlexander on Monday September 18, 2023 @09:06PM
(#37564478)
> It's more like using the power of government to ensure the company has no alternative to the union.
Unions absolutely do not need the government to exist. It is only through government attempts to control and curtail unions that the government has involved itself in unions. See for example the Taft-Hartley act:
Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by WalterBright on Monday September 18, 2023 @09:27PM
(#37564625)
> Unions absolutely do not need the government to exist.
That's absolutely correct. But in America, the unions use the government to tilt the balance heavily in their favor.
Re:Striking auto workers want a 40% pay increase–the same ra...
by TaylorAlexander on Tuesday September 19, 2023 @04:29AM
(#37567018)
What makes you say that? The Taft Hartley act I linked to significantly weakened union power in this country. In other countries like Germany unions have much more power and representation.
Yes, it does, in each scenario you presented.
> We are free to change the perceived value of workers through the power of worker solidarity
It's more like using the power of government to ensure the company has no alternative to the union.
Company leaders have no actual power over the workers. They cannot force anyone to come to work. They cannot have you arrested. They cannot confiscate your property. They cannot beat you. They cannot prevent you from accepting a job at another company. They cannot prevent you from leaving. They cannot extort, libel, slander, blackmail, or threaten you. They cannot put a hit on you.
All they can do is offer you money in exchange for your labor. That's it.