• randough@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    He could have been part of a unionization effort, instead he chose violence, harmed his peers, and took away that possibility.

    • Jankatarch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Companies fought to nullify unions. It’s the companies’ fault people don’t just join unions and negotiate anymore.

    • BillCheddar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Hi, my name is (whatever the fuck your disappointed parents named you) and I don’t understand a lick about context, history, or why my one-off attempt at sounding smart comes off like I couldn’t find my own ass with two hands and a map.

    • Eldritch@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      9 hours ago

      These companies actively make that unfeesable. They’d spend the extra money to close the location. Claim it was unprofitable. And hire all new ununionized staff elsewhere.

      • krisevol@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 hours ago

        How is that different that now? Everyone is out of a job, the warehouse is closed, and those jobs aren’t coming back.

        • BillCheddar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Yes, but now the owners get nothing either.

          And more importantly, the other owners of other companies have two brilliant examples of what can happen when you continue to fuck with workers: If you are lucky, workers will only burn all your shit to the ground. If you’re unlucky, you get Luigi’ed. EITHER WAY, THE NEXT BUSINESS OWNER WILL THINK TWICE ABOUT CUTTING WAGES AND FUCKING WITH WORKERS.

          That’s the benefit for all. You just have to be capable of thinking about someone other than yourself.

          • krisevol@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            The next owner will think twice about using American labor for sure, we can agree about that.

            • SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 hours ago

              Oooo, what a threat. You sure got them. Nice. Nailed it. Well done. So thoughtful. So smart. Oh wise sage. So worldly.

              Hahahahahahaha

            • BillCheddar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 hours ago

              I can’t tell if you’re being deliberately obtuse or if you’re just thick-headed.

              By chance are you a conservative?

              • krisevol@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                56 minutes ago

                No. Im liberal for California. Not to be confused with the democratic party btw. The Democrats party is the party if the elites and don’t listen to the working class. I voted for Bernie Sanders in the primary. I love medical for all, but i absolutely think Obama care ruined healthcare and made it expensive as hell.

        • Jax@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          7 hours ago

          The massive amount of product lost and the perfectly good building destroyed?

          Like, the difference is the damage — it’s a very big spectacle and proof that all it takes is 1 person in the right place and you can cause massive damage. The Dems aren’t going to save you if you don’t scare them into saving you.

        • Eldritch@piefed.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          ·
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          If you unionize the location mysteriously becomes unprofitable and they have to shut it down leaving everyone without a job. If you burn it down, the location closes leaving everyone without a job. But costing the bastards who can’t spare the profit to pay their workers a fair wage Millions. The arrangements of the unions was never please please Mr Boss Man can we be allowed to live too. It was paying us a fair wage or you might wake up dead in your own bed.

      • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        6 hours ago

        He filed a lawsuit in 2024 against his former employer, PrimeFlight, alleging unpaid wages and missed break times.

    • null@lemmy.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 hours ago

      You bring up a good point and it’s dumb you’re being downvoted for it. That being said, I don’t think a union would have hurt the shareholders in the same way.

      • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        It’s not a good point.

        Anyone who’s been paying attention knows that corporations have gutted union rights, laws and the NLRB. Trying to organize a union is a long shot and you’re just as likely to be fired (for something completely unrelated, of course) the first time you start talking to people about unions.

        Companies like this can fire low wage employees all day every day for years (look at Amazon’s warehouse turnover rate) just to prevent a union from forming. If they ever get to the point where there will be a union vote the company will pay millions for some union busting firm to come in and suddenly all of the pro-union people’s work is under a microscope, anti-union propaganda is everywhere and they’re scaring the other workers with talks of closing the business if a union happens.

        They drag it out until everyone quits, is fired or is scared away from voting. Even if the vote passes the company is under no real obligation to negotiate with the union and the NLRB is effectively toothless. A union can go years and years without seeing any meaningful changes.

        Unions and labor rights were the compromise, what this man did is only a small taste of what it was like before the compromise. His target was inventory, not people. That wasn’t always the case.

        • null@lemmy.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          It’s a terrific point. All the people who worked there are now out of work.

          • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            te reo Māori
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            4 hours ago

            The point was:

            He could have been part of a unionization effort, instead he chose violence, harmed his peers, and took away that possibility.

            Saying that he should have just tried to unionize demonstrates an ignorance of the state of unionization in the US as I outlined in my comment.

            He could have begged outside of the headquarters too, for all of the good it would do. Treating unionization as if it were some viable option is not a good point.

            I’m not saying that everyone should burn their place of employment down, but he did it in a way that led to nobody being injured and the message resonates with a lot of people. Much like Luigi, it isn’t that what he did is the right thing, but it is undoubtedly a more effective message to the elites than printing union flyers and getting fired.

            California has unemployment and, assuming this company cheats their employees by making them all part-time, it pays as much or more than their lost wages.

            These kinds of things are going to keep happening as the lower class is squeezed by economic pressures and the elites who control the political system block any attempt at reforms that would benefit the labor class. In the grand scheme of things, the harm suffered here was financial and not measured in human lives.