- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Sweden’s Tesla blockade is spreading — Starting Friday, dockworkers in all Swedish ports will refuse to offload Teslas, cleaning crews will no longer clean showrooms, and mechanics won’t fix chargi…::Starting Friday, dockworkers in all Swedish ports will refuse to offload Teslas, cleaning crews will no longer clean showrooms, and mechanics won’t fix charging points as the labor dispute rages on.
In some ways I’m surprised by the confusing name of right to work states which turns out to be really easy to fire states.
“Right to work” refers to the fact that in those states, unions cannot force membership or payment, or force you to participate in labor strikes. You can still have a union in those states, but it’s very difficult for them to be effective because most people will choose not to pay into it, and strikes have significantly less bargaining power if there’s no legal obligation for union members to follow through with a strike.
The result is that in such states, there are very few unions, and so very few protections against firing workers for arbitrary reasons.
I feel like there’s something more missing. We have “right to work” in Belgium. You can’t be forced to join a union or a strike, yet unions are strong here.
Propaganda is the key difference, would be my guess. American’s have had anti-union sentiments shoved down their throats for many many years now.
I grew up in a “right to work” and “at will” state working mostly retail, and I can confirm that most of the break rooms had a poster going over the negatives of unionization.
The “at will” part makes it so the boss can fire an employee for any reason they want, so anybody trying to unionize would be let go for some arbitrary reason if they were found out, anyways.
It is also the really easy to leave states. When my old company was taken over by new owners, a few years down the line someone was leaving to go work somewhere else. They gave their two weeks notice and was fired on the spot. Next guy that went to work elsewhere just quit without notice as they already knew they would not get their two weeks.
So they don’t have to pay out the notice? I think locally they can fire you but then have to pay severance which depending on length of employment can be many more weeks than 2.