this post was submitted on 26 Dec 2023
356 points (93.4% liked)

politics

19143 readers
3090 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sunforged@lemmy.ml 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yes but when union membership is only at 10% what impact are you really talking about nationwide?

[–] TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The 10% of union wages should still impact the rest of the industry, so the 10% of the workforce getting raises and concessions will force other companies to increase wages or benefits, even if it isn't as much as the unions' increases.

[–] Sunforged@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago

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.