Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[Sheb]

Okay, could happen I guess. How is the leadership chosen? I mean, over here it's always elections by members, so it prevent that kind of **it. What kind of benefit are you talking about?

[Dutchling]

Okay, could happen I guess. How is the leadership chosen? I mean, over here it's always elections by members, so it prevent that kind of **it. What kind of benefit are you talking about?

Yeah that's totally works.

* Dutchling looks at every democratic nation ever

[Sheb]

Firt, unions are smaller than nations, so democracy works better, plus the spectrum of issue in union politics is smaller, so you can't use diversionary tactics about THEM GAYS BRAKE OUR WEATHER!! or something.

[Dutchling]

I bet US unions would do that if they weren't fictional.

[Sheb]

Actually they don't, and, in as much as their members have higher living standard than non-members, they do their jobs rather well. If union weren't effective, corporate America and their lobbyist wouldn't try that hard to destroy them.

[10ebbor10]

I am not trying to support the companies here, nor denounce every union ever existing, but any organization that uses violence or intimidation to achieve anything except stopping ongoing use of it by someone else makes said organization lose a bit of legitimacy in my eyes, be they unions, companies or governments, or anyone else you can think of.

I wouldn't classify strikes under intimidation or violence, but anyway...

[scrdest]

Okay, could happen I guess. How is the leadership chosen? I mean, over here it's always elections by members, so it prevent that kind of **it. What kind of benefit are you talking about?

I would have to read up on the former. As for the latter, mostly synecures.

Firt, unions are smaller than nations, so democracy works better, plus the spectrum of issue in union politics is smaller, so you can't use diversionary tactics about THEM GAYS BRAKE OUR WEATHER!! or something.

Over here, I wouldn't be so sure. Poland is, as far as the ideology of average Joe goes, waaaay backwards. In particular, attempts to introduce the idea that being TEH GHEY =/= being an avatar of Satan Hitler has met with tremendous resistance and media, government and Catholic Church, in inverse order chronologically, claiming it's sexualizing children (basically the ol' GAYS ARE PEDOPHILES! hysteria).

Speaking of which, the major unions have allied, and a significant part of their membership supports, the major opposition party which is pretty much the ideological antithesis of mine (socially conservative, Christian, quasi-nationalist (not outright, but they are supported by outright neo-Nazis)).

I wouldn't classify strikes under intimidation or violence, but anyway...

I don't particularly mind strikes, but I've heard a union call for the boycott of a company where their members were working lately - that actually harms each employee more than the employer. Or things like lock-ins - I consider that, for all instances and purposes, an act of kidnapping.

[Mr. Strange]

Over here (Finland) representatives of workers unions, employers unions and government get together and form (or try to form) collective labour agreement that covers all industries and other sectors of economy and defines the legal minimum standards for workers and employer responsibilities inside Finish borders. Usually they succeed. Which brings us to those Polish workers that fill all larger construction sites...

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Seriously, you guys are being screwed over and over. Those minimum wages apply for EVERYONE who works in Finland is entitled, even if they are not Finish, and you are getting paid by Polish wages? Seriously...

[scriver]

If the left-center group wins the Swedish election this year they might try to forbid companies to bypass the collective agreements. The right-wing called this "protectionism". And yeah, it is, I guess. Trying to protect foreign workers from getting taken advantage of. Apparently that is a bad thing.

We'll see what EU will say about it if it ever gets in motion. I have very little faith they'll show any reason in the matter, though.

[Sheb]

Well, it can be a problem for foreign firms that want to operate in Finland for example. In a way it is protectionism, but if it's the only way to preserve labor standard, I'm okay with it.

[Helgoland]

Why? They have to pay the same wages as the Finnish, after all - it seems very sensible to me. Not that that is correlated to anything...

[Helgoland]

-damn 504's disadvantaging foreign competition-

[Sheb]

Well, it's going to be a mess, because suddenly if you want to bid on a Finnish contract that require sending staff there, you'll have to change all your employee's contracts to fit Finnish law, so you'll not bother to bid and Finnish firms we alone enjoy the market.

[Dutchling]

Politicians are awesome at handling floods.

[scrdest]

Also - it's (usually) not that the immigrants are forced at a gunpoint to work for the employer - they agree to work for less because it's still better than what they would get in their home country - otherwise they wouldn't have emigrated from there.

So in a way, this is protectionism, but not of Finnish companies, but of Finnish workers - if you make sure immigrants and natives are paid the same, you make immigrant workers less competitive to their Finnish colleagues.