this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
1565 points (99.4% liked)

Work Reform

11220 readers
2084 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 274 points 23 hours ago (10 children)

I love how one person cites a statistic, and another person just dismisses it as false because of their anecdotal experience.

[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 85 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Sounds like every online platform ever.

[–] pdxfed@lemmy.world 14 points 22 hours ago

Actually, that's not true at all. This one time, I met a guy who...

[–] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 50 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

This is how most people think and see the world, which is why we (the US) are in the boat we're in now. People don't see the big picture if they never have to or aren't taught how to think critically.

[–] faythofdragons@slrpnk.net 14 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

I think it's a complicated problem. To start with, the studies are usually paywalled. If you can afford to purchase access, you still need the capacity to understand and parse the formal academic language. Most people have neither of those requirements, and have to rely on the media to report the statistics accurately, which doesn't happen.

This leads to a situation where the media keeps trying to say, idk employment statistics are better than ever, and then everybody updates their mental blocklist to filter out the word 'statistics'.

[–] Frozengyro@lemmy.world 13 points 19 hours ago

Not to mention most issues are extremely nuanced and complex, not something that can be accurately broken down into 5 second sound bits.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kahdbrixk@feddit.org 14 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

My thoughts exactly. And how I love this complete dismissal style with the "False." at the beginning, that has established itself online. it's a perfect giveaway for " now my personal but universal opinion, also called Truth bomb, is going to destroy your statement" - which in my opinion is just extremely patronizing and never really true.

Especially when comparing your personal anecdotal experience with a fucking statistic.

Oh and nobody talks like that in real life, or at least the people that do start their verbal line of argument this way are idiots and everybody knows it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jonne@infosec.pub 13 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

And I've never heard of a contract that explicitly ties non-union workers' pay to the union contact, but I'd be cheering the union guys on if they ever asked for a raise if that was the case.

[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 10 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

That's actually more common than you think. It's not explicit.

My niece who works at a very popular coffee shop where some are unioned, the non-union ones get paid a bit extra and reminded on the daily about that benefit of higher pay for being non-unioned.

And my aunt works as a receptionist in a non-union hospital. Her counterparts in a union, when they went on strike and got a huge pay bump... She suddenly "mysteriously" got a pay bump aligned with it because the non-union hospital was afraid of employees unionizing (which secretly, they were).

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] PaupersSerenade@sh.itjust.works 187 points 1 day ago (5 children)

I live in California, so there was a lot of bemoaning the rising minimum wage.

“Why should someone flipping burgers earn as much as I do in a trade field?”

Mate, you should be arguing for increased wages, not trying to keep others down.

[–] Flames5123@sh.itjust.works 37 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Seattle metro area has the highest minimum wage in the country. The top 5 cities in the US are all in this metro. This is because when the wage increases were passed by city, they were tied to the inflation rate so that increases every year, so no new laws have to be passed year over year to get this increase. No arguing every year for a simple cost of living adjustment.

[–] Chip_Rat@lemmy.world 17 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Fucking thank you! Why is this so complicated?? Why fight for $15 or whatever if you know by the time your get the fucking laws past your dollar is worth half as much.

It's so transparently flawed to because tying minimum wage to a formula/basket/col/astrology FFS, Would mean not having to revisit this fight every. Single. Year.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 24 points 22 hours ago

Mate, you should be arguing for increased wages, not trying to keep others down.

It’s my opinion that people like this aspire to be their own boss, make their own money, and look up to business owners as mentors.

None of that is inherently wrong, until the mentors/business owners start espousing the evils of increased wages, how paying taxes is preventing pay raises for their workers, etc.

So not knowing any better, these wannabes go out and parrot what they’ve heard their heroes say as if it’s gospel. And of course the talking heads that they listen to say the same shit, further solidifying the class warfare mentality.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 14 points 20 hours ago

Those same people get mad if nobody is flipping burgers for them.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 146 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Cathy is a dumbass. Don't be like Cathy.

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 76 points 23 hours ago (4 children)

That’s up there with refusing raises to avoid going up a tax bracket.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 31 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (3 children)

I will forgive people who were previously had a low enough income to have benefits that magically disappeared completely at a certain threshold when they received a raise for assuming that making too much money could be a negative. They generally never made enough to understand how tax brackets work and assumed the worst.

If it is explained to them and they refuse to learn, that is on them.

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 10 points 22 hours ago

Yes, that is something that really sucks.

Here in Ontario disability gets clawed back as soon as you stop making poverty wages, it’s disgusting.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] needanke@feddit.org 13 points 23 hours ago

Cathy? If I see FirstNameBunchOfNumbers and a twitter checkmark my first assumption would be that its a bot.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 109 points 23 hours ago (6 children)

"your statistic is false because I have an anecdote" is literally the entire basis of the conservative understanding of science.

union workers don't make more on average because I earn half a dollar more.

global warming isn't happening because I brought a snowball.

vaccines cause death because my friend walked out of a clinic after a shot and got hit by a self driving tesla.

[–] Hadriscus@lemm.ee 22 points 20 hours ago

vaccines cause death because my friend walked out of a clinic after a shot and got hit by a self driving tesla.

😂

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] varjen@lemmy.world 84 points 12 hours ago (4 children)

Together we bargain, alone we beg.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 67 points 20 hours ago (5 children)

How is it even legal to have explicitly preferential pay for people not in a union? Is there a limit to that, or can companies just say, "Anyone who joins a union will be paid minimum wage." Ofc with at-will employment they can always just fire you, but like, if you think about it it's pretty fucked up right?

[–] Stern@lemmy.world 24 points 18 hours ago (12 children)

I wouldn't be surprised if the union has other benefits that more then make up for the 50 cents, e.g. better medical, vacation, or whatever.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] lime@feddit.nu 16 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

sounds like their pay is based on union rates. that's probably just a company policy for everyone.

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 12 points 12 hours ago (39 children)

What I'm saying is that if they can set "$0.50 above union rates" as the company policy for everyone, they can also set "$5 above union rates" as the company policy for everyone and then cut union rates by $5. It's essentially just bribing people to not join a union or penalizing them if they do. It being company policy for everyone is irrelevant.

[–] bstix@feddit.dk 11 points 9 hours ago (11 children)

They can't cut union rates.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 9 points 5 hours ago (25 children)

They can't cut union rates since they have a contract. So they can, within reason, pay non union workers more but not lower the pay of union workers. One of the benefits of being in the union is that they can't just lower your wages and they may have issues firing you for bad reasons.

There's a limit to how much they can pay the ununionized workers before it becomes clear they're trying to interfere with the workers rights to free organization. In the image, it's quite likely that the extra 50¢ is union dues, or could be explained as related to costs.

load more comments (25 replies)
load more comments (37 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] kryptonianCodeMonkey@lemmy.world 57 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"Rising waters lifts all ships", Cathy. Ever heard of it?

[–] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 16 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

"This is my water! You go float on your own water!"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mumblerfish@lemmy.world 52 points 23 hours ago

This is what Swedish unions did even more directly. A company hired labour from Latvia I think it was. The union showed up and said that thats all fine, but you have to pay them properly. None of them were members. They picketed the company for the sake of non-members wages. Why? To avoid social dumping down the line.

[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 47 points 7 hours ago

Lol the fact that she even has a contract at all is because of unions.

[–] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 46 points 15 hours ago (5 children)

Man I was sad as shit when Nina Turner lost. Bernie Sanders backed her up too.

[–] Filthmontane@lemmy.world 16 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

I think she's running again. I was at a UAW conference last week and Nina Turner spoke there. I think she's trying to drum up support for another run.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 42 points 1 day ago

This doesn't even need to be in your contract. When union shops get a raise, non-union shops either have to compete, or lose their best labour.

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 24 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Net income is a small factor. One should compare the total package because the unions are usually way ahead of the non-union.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 22 points 2 hours ago

When somebody insists, "X doesn't matter because my salary depends on X," it's time to stop beating your head against a wall to teach them anything.

[–] pinheadednightmare@lemm.ee 16 points 20 hours ago (1 children)
[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 11 points 18 hours ago

Cathy is the average American.

Realize that half of the rest are even more moronic

[–] slappypantsgo@lemm.ee 13 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Pretty soon we won’t be able to trust BLS data, which is frightening.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›