Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem



Why didn´t they go on strike 100% on day one? Like "We do absolutely nothing if You don´t agree on something within the next 24h." You can clean Your office alone, no driver, no cook, no government services for anyone, no nothing, no bodyguards. If anybody breaks the strike - he gets shot by accident, but sadly the police will be on strike too.
"Everett Kelley, who leads the American Federation of Government Employees representing more than 800,000 workers, avoided assigning blame to either party"
"avoided assigning blame to either party"
But if they have a workers union it should be impossible that it could come to a situation that the people work for no money, or temporary lose their work and income. It´s only possible when these workers unions are the most useless workers unions on the planet - which automatically invalidates everything they could possibly say.
you expected something different from a bait thread lol?
Nobody paying Everett Kelley right now. He normally makes $21,000 a month.
You say that, but labor unions in the US do tend to have a very close relationship with organized crime families who organized and ran unions to extort businesses for money by threatening strikes, and then a significant portion of the money the union members receive go to the union leadership (mafia) as union dues, essentially forcing businesses to pay "protection money" to avoid labor stoppages.
You didn't read the article very clearly. It's democrats who are asking for things they want to be added to a spending bill when republicans have voted over a dozen times now on a clean one to continue things at existing rates. By the top of these labor unions demanding a signing of such a clean spending bill, they are siding with republicans, despite directly blaming democrats or not.
Unions are less about "workers rights" and more about collective bargaining for money and gatekeeping. For example, some states have it so you cannot work in a trade like electrician, carpenter, plumber, etc unless you're in the associated labor union. Which means the union, not just the employer, gets to decide whether or not you're even allowed to get hired in that career. Firstly, they intentionally keep their membership constrained in order to keep competition down, and wages higher. However, if allowed to work as one, you are required to pay the head of that union a portion of what you earn for that privilege.
Of course, since many of these trades are construction, it makes the cost of construction higher, which reduces housing, and jacks up housing costs. That's a big part of why it costs so much more to live in a place like New York.
As a member You´d need to pay a fee of course. Don´t know - not so much. I guess 30,-€ or depending on the income per month, so there´s money when there´s a strike, and two times per year there would be a meeting for like 2 hours each, for which You get 200,-€, but this may also depend on the union. And the meeting is like sitting there and drinking beer, while some people hold speeches. Which is why You drink the beer to make this bearable. And then You can either stay there and have a party or drive home. You still get the full money for it, so i prefer to go home, because i like to spend as little time as possible on work or with co-workers, who tend to only talk about work...
Still the Unions here are not good. Like they rarely go on strike, and are in general too much in favor of the employer. Like the Unions should be about that the workers have a say how it works, and not agree with all kinds of decisions. And the actual Union people would need to be payed by the employer - depending on the size of the company, and they can´t get fired of course. There would be elections for them every now and then.
No its simply true,
https://apnews.com/article/trump-chavezderemer-labor-secretary-unions-republicans-1bff41e4caef610dbf38ead24d292e67
The only Unions that would go with the Democrats America Last agenda are ones with subverted leadership
https://youtu.be/VwvQs-i75zk
https://youtu.be/z_7dPRSBmqw?feature=share
It's pretty common for someone to actually get screwed over by an employer and the union does nothing because it would cost them more money than what that one individual was paying in dues. So they just replace them. They deny hundreds every year to keep their numbers fixed so it's not hard to let a couple more in to keep paying. But, particularly in my state you HAVE to sign up and pay them dues, or you just don't work in that industry no matter how qualifies you are, no matter how much you need the job.
You'll hear a lot of nonsense about "right to work" states, but all that does is prevent unions from being able to tell people they can't get a job. You can still sign up with one. You can still pay the dues, get any "benefits" they may offer, maybe even get paid more. But, you don't have to if you don't want to.