Watch the Moment 43 Unionized YouTube Contractors Were All Laid Off (msn.com) 178
An anonymous Slashdot reader shared this report from The Washington Post:
A YouTube contractor was addressing the Austin City Council on Thursday, calling on them to urge Google to negotiate with his union, when a colleague interrupted him with jaw-dropping news: His 43-person team of contractors had all been laid off...
The YouTube workers, who work for Google and Cognizant, unanimously voted to unionize under the Alphabet Workers Union-CWA in April 2023. Since then, the workers say that Google has refused to bargain with them. Thursday's layoff signifies continued tensions between Google and its workers, some of whom in 2021 formed a union...
Workers had about 20 minutes to gather their belongings and leave the premises before they were considered trespassing.
Video footage of the moment is embedded at the top of the article. "I was speechless, shocked," said the contractor who'd been speaking. He told the Washington Post "I didn't know what to do. But angered, that was the main feeling." The council meeting was streaming live online and has since spread on social media. The contractors view the layoff as retaliation for unionizing, but Google and information technology subcontractor Cognizant said it was the normal end of a business contract.
The ability for layoffs to spread over social media highlights how the painful experience of a job loss is frequently being made public, from employees sharing recordings of Zoom meetings to posting about their unemployment. The increasing tension between YouTube's contractors and Google comes as massive layoffs continue to hit the tech industry — leaving workers uneasy and companies emboldened. Google already has had rounds of cuts the past two years.
Google has been in a long-running battle with many of its contractors as they seek the perks and high pay that full-time Google workers are accustomed to. The company has tens of thousands of contractors doing everything from food service to sales to writing code... Google maintains that Cognizant is responsible for the contractors' employment and working conditions, and therefore isn't responsible for bargaining with them. Cognizant said it is offering the workers seven weeks of paid time to explore other roles at the company and use its training resources.
Last year, the National Labor Relations Board ruled that Cognizant and Google are joint employers of the contractors. In January, the NLRB sent a cease-and-desist letter to both employers for failing to bargain with the union. Since then the issue of joint employment, which would ultimately determine which company is responsible for bargaining, has landed in an appeals court and has yet to be ruled on.
"Workers say they don't have sick pay, receive minimal benefits and are paid as little as $19 an hour," according to the article, "forcing some to work multiple jobs to make ends meet." Sam Regan, a data analyst contractor for YouTube Music, told the Washington Post that he was one of the last workers to leave the meeting where the layoffs were announced.
"Upon leaving, he heard one of the security guards call the non-emergency police line to report trespassers."
The YouTube workers, who work for Google and Cognizant, unanimously voted to unionize under the Alphabet Workers Union-CWA in April 2023. Since then, the workers say that Google has refused to bargain with them. Thursday's layoff signifies continued tensions between Google and its workers, some of whom in 2021 formed a union...
Workers had about 20 minutes to gather their belongings and leave the premises before they were considered trespassing.
Video footage of the moment is embedded at the top of the article. "I was speechless, shocked," said the contractor who'd been speaking. He told the Washington Post "I didn't know what to do. But angered, that was the main feeling." The council meeting was streaming live online and has since spread on social media. The contractors view the layoff as retaliation for unionizing, but Google and information technology subcontractor Cognizant said it was the normal end of a business contract.
The ability for layoffs to spread over social media highlights how the painful experience of a job loss is frequently being made public, from employees sharing recordings of Zoom meetings to posting about their unemployment. The increasing tension between YouTube's contractors and Google comes as massive layoffs continue to hit the tech industry — leaving workers uneasy and companies emboldened. Google already has had rounds of cuts the past two years.
Google has been in a long-running battle with many of its contractors as they seek the perks and high pay that full-time Google workers are accustomed to. The company has tens of thousands of contractors doing everything from food service to sales to writing code... Google maintains that Cognizant is responsible for the contractors' employment and working conditions, and therefore isn't responsible for bargaining with them. Cognizant said it is offering the workers seven weeks of paid time to explore other roles at the company and use its training resources.
Last year, the National Labor Relations Board ruled that Cognizant and Google are joint employers of the contractors. In January, the NLRB sent a cease-and-desist letter to both employers for failing to bargain with the union. Since then the issue of joint employment, which would ultimately determine which company is responsible for bargaining, has landed in an appeals court and has yet to be ruled on.
"Workers say they don't have sick pay, receive minimal benefits and are paid as little as $19 an hour," according to the article, "forcing some to work multiple jobs to make ends meet." Sam Regan, a data analyst contractor for YouTube Music, told the Washington Post that he was one of the last workers to leave the meeting where the layoffs were announced.
"Upon leaving, he heard one of the security guards call the non-emergency police line to report trespassers."
Good Information... (Score:5, Insightful)
Just remember how little they care about people when you are applying for a job and they make promises about raises and promotions in the future.
Re:Good Information... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The funny thing is those that call them left wingers. At least economically, they're quite right wing.
Re: (Score:2)
True enough. Just follow the money, and consider who gets to benefit from this distraction. It's not going to be you or me, that's for sure.
Re: (Score:2)
You're either an idiot, or you're being paid. You have *no* idea what socialsm, or Marxism is, and no, none of it was "financed by western capitalists", unless you want to suggest that western capitalists made themselves so vile trying to take over Russia and China (see "opium wars", for example) that they pushed it.
Re: Good Information... (Score:2)
I would lay off all YouTube people too. Text-to-Video with OpenAI is going to replace a lot of jobs....
Re: Good Information... (Score:2)
Re:Bad Assumptions. (Score:5, Insightful)
> Don’t assume every employer is going to bullshit you at the interview because a handful of social media attention whores decided to do what they do best after it happened to them.
More often than not, it is bullshit - meaning a ploy to get you to join, if they are inclined to hire you. It is a pleasantry, rather than an indication of likelihood.
> If you think judging this harshly about a future employer is some kind of good thing, I’m going to bet you’re single and will stay that way.
You're delusional.
Re:Bad Assumptions. (Score:5, Insightful)
If you think judging this harshly about a future employer is some kind of good thing, I’m going to bet you’re single and will stay that way.
That's an... interesting take. Speaking from some sort of odd experience?
People really shouldn't go into a new job either trusting OR distrusting their new employer. What they should do is get everything in writing before they sign the contract, so that trust (or lack of it) isn't in play at all.
Re: Bad Assumptions. (Score:2)
Contract??? What contract. Most people are "at will" employees. I would love to have a contract.
Re: (Score:2)
people should boycott all "at will employee" states and companies, period.
Re: Bad Assumptions. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People really shouldn't go into a new job either trusting OR distrusting their new employer.
Including when their employer is a union?
https://www.axios.com/2023/10/... [axios.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Conversely, if they promised you a raise and you don't get it, you need to advocate for yourself and ask for a raise. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.
Re: (Score:2)
Hardy-har-har. When I worked for the Scummy Mortgage Co in Austin in the mid/late eighties, they hired me at a low rate, and promised $1k/yr more after probation. Which was six months!
Then, three months in, they froze everyone's salary (forget the raise). They did, of course, give the execs bonuses...
The fact that (Score:5, Insightful)
Companies are scared to death of unions tells you everything.
Re: (Score:2)
It also speaks that their roles weren't as important or valuable as they thought. If they were, the union would have worked, in this case, the math went the other way and they were made redundant.
What I mean is that unionizing is a gamble, it will work if it's a role that's really needed by the company, but if it's not, if it's something that could easily be done remotely in any other country for much less money, tough luck.
Re:The fact that (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly what woke feel for white and white-passing people like Jews and East Asians.
Anyone perplexed as to what that means? I've asked some of my east Asian friends and they were like, "Huh? Who thinks we are white?"
Re:The fact that (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
https://news.slashdot.org/comm... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Since you couldn't give a single example of one of these groups it would appear they are indeed fictional. Inventing a fictional oppressor is all the rage these days.
Erm... He literally gave you an example.
Seeing as you chose to ignore it, you must be one of them.
Re: (Score:2)
with little to no indigenous genetics
Indigenous to where?
Re: (Score:2)
But they will happily hate on Hispanics despite the fact that in certain areas the people are practically straight up Spanish with little to no indigenous genetics.
He means the Americas. For example many South Americans have direct ancestry to Spain with little heritage of the native population. They tend to look white European. Generally racists think all Hispanics are "brown people".
Re:The fact that (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: The fact that (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
“Self-defeating” might be even clearer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
https://shec.ashp.cuny.edu/ite... [cuny.edu]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Historically they're not, as they exist primarily as an extension of Internationalist Worker movement from late 1800s and early 1900s, and as industrialization progressed to third world bloomed there as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Historically they're not, as they exist primarily as an extension of Internationalist Worker movement from late 1800s and early 1900s, and as industrialization progressed to third world bloomed there as well.
Not US labor. Which was created by pretty racist dudes, and practiced racism via the unions. As for the third world, yeah its a workers paradise huh.
Re: (Score:3)
The logic you keep using is internally contradictory. Unions would not exist in "worker's paradise" as they would be utterly unnecessary in one.
Nope, because the unions failed to create a workers paradise in the third world. Hence the "quotes".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
YouTube thanks you for your fealty. Keep licking those boots! One day they'll notice you!
Sorry, your time has expired. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What does Google have to do with Cognizant? (Score:2, Troll)
Has nothing to do with Unions or protections for workers. Shitty? Sure, cause Google has been doing Evil since they started. When you need to say "Do no evil" to remind yourself of your own nature to do evil -- its already lost.
Re: (Score:3)
The NLRB ruled otherwise. See summary.
Google has everything to do with them.
Re: (Score:3)
...and this is what will have the NLRB declared unconstitutional. I am not sure what the middle ground is; should the NLRB be able to determine what types of business arrangements are core to a company's function? Should companies have flexibility in using staffing agencies for temporary or cyclical needs? There really is a delicately balance there.
Re: What does Google have to do with Cognizant? (Score:2)
We can tell employers they must not discriminate on certain things, must pay certain wages,.must give certain breaks, must provide certain fringe benefits. If a company is obviously avoiding the rights of employees to unionize by putting a token wedge "contractor" in the middle, I figure the government can decide whether that's a distinction without a difference.
Re: (Score:2)
calvinism (Score:2)
>to remind yourself of your own nature to do evil
I'm going to dub this, "Calvinist Economics" :)
hawk
That's cold. (Score:5, Insightful)
Google and information technology subcontractor Cognizant said it was the normal end of a business contract.
So... how many people have had contracts that ended with "you have 20 minutes to gather your belongings and leave the premise before we call the police"?
I don't think the union knows how employment works (Score:3, Insightful)
Clearly IANAL and probably a dumbass... But I've worked a number of contracts before and I've never felt entitled to make demands with the company I was contracted to by a contracting company. I never asked for more hours or pay from the contracted company, but I would with the company I worked for. I've even managed the work for my contracting company and I wouldn't ask the contracted company for more hours for my employees I'd ask my company. In the end the money for those hours come out of the contract and not from the 3rd party. If we were going to miss our service level agreement or metrics it would likely make financial sense to throw more hours at the problem than to take the penalty which was usually SIGNIFICANT, it would also mean we were more likely to get a renewal (and get the obligatory pizza party) because we kept the customer happy.
How do they think this is supposed to work? These contractors don't work for Google, they work for the contracting company Cognizant. Why would the union employees negotiate with Google when they don't work for Google but they work for Cognizant? Cognizant would need to negotiate on the unions behalf with Google, not the Union employees negotiating on Cognizant's behalf with Google. If Cognizant was it self owned and operated by the unionized employees, then isn't Google negotiating the (corporate?) entity Cognizant and it doesn't matter that Cognizant's employees are unionized?
Having worked in part on new contracts Google and Cognizant would set contract terms, like work performed, term period, and costs. Google would have contracted X dollars for Y work with W requirements (which could be anything from # of employees working, but especially SLAs) for Z years/months/days, beyond that they won't care how Cognizant accomplishes it. It's then Cognizant problem for them to work out how they do this work and make it financially viable. We wouldn't have taken a contract if it wasn't going to benefit us, when it's the employees that own the company I imagine all they want are the pay cheques but why would that change Google's position?
Re: (Score:2)
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to use contract companies, one of them is to ensure you have no issues getting rid of the excess staff when you're done with whatever you hired them for.
However, just from the summary it sounds like these people were embedded into Google as if they were regular Google employees - in which case the use of a contract house is simply a way to avoid having these people on your own books directly and having to treat them with the minimum standards that apply to your own emp
Re:I don't think the union knows how employment wo (Score:5, Informative)
Normally, yes, but the NLRB ruled otherwise. They say Google is responsible.
Re:I don't think the union knows how employment wo (Score:5, Insightful)
In theory yes, in practice it's a common flaw that people sometimes litigate. There's enough money in it that lobbyists ensure it isn't fixed for the workers.
In theory the company (in this case Google) gets a contract with another company (in this case Cognizant) for workers, and Cognizant pulls from it's enormous pool of talent to bring in workers for the job, then move the workers to the next job, then the next, then the next. The workers theoretically are employed for the long term, with the job being a short term gig in a long term stable employment.
In practice, it is companies like Google using the contract company in lieu of regular employment contracts, hired only for the one project by Google, with skills needed only for the project ordered by Google, using tools provided by Google. By contracting with another business they can skirt around most employment and labor laws. They do a lot so it isn't their violation, they simply asked a business partner to do something, and the partner potentially committed the violation.
As one example of many, large layoffs aren't Google's layoffs, Google is simply ending a business contract with another business so it isn't subject to Google issuing a WARN act notice.
Re:I don't think the union knows how employment wo (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
I worked as an independent software contractor for 17 years, almost never for an agency and never for anything like Cognizant. Cognizant doesn't provide the top talent. When a junior software engineer starts with Cognizant they work on contract and then when they get enough experience, usually after a year or two they quit and get a higher paying job somewhere else. As an independent contractor you are to provide your own health/life/disability insurance. In the US you have to pay the employer and emplo
Re: (Score:2)
They work for Cognizant. All their benefits/pay/whatever is paid by Cognizant. AT&T is only responsible for whatever is stated in the contract.
Long ago I worked for a big contracting company and was one of a group of engineers contracted to work at AT&T. Our AT&T supervisor was great and treated us well -- but he did make the point that "you're basically an expensive piece of office furniture" on his budget. The contract did allow for him to reward us financially -- but it was indirect. He'
About those 7 weeks they are being "offered" (Score:5, Interesting)
They are talking about Cognizants now drastically reduced "bench" time where, once you're not on a project, you either find a new client or get laid off, totally automated.
You get asked trivia by internal recruiters who know nothing and who call it a "work refusal" if you don't accept an interview for a devops position if you're a developer. If you're a developer, you get asked insulting questions until you miss a piece of trivia. Typically, they always choose a remote south asian over anyone in the US, because Cognizant makes so, so so much more money. They'll also ask you to modify your resume to suit the position (ie. fake credentials) vs. submit you "as is".
Such an awful, awful place to be at. No doubt this was an agreement made that both Cognizant and Google were for. It's punishment for standing up to our dear corporate overlords.
$19 an hour? (Score:2)
Why are people doing this work for $19 an hour? Unless they are working remote from somewhere very cheap that's not going to cover their cost of living.
Why work there? (Score:2)
"Workers say they don't have sick pay, receive minimal benefits and are paid as little as $19 an hour," according to the article, "forcing some to work multiple jobs to make ends meet." Sam Regan, a data analyst contractor
So, um, why work there at all? There are no jobs better?
Factories (Score:2)
There are job shops around me paying $30/hour with benefits to run CNC machines. They'll even pay for your training. But, nobody wants to work in a factory.
Re: (Score:2)
There are job shops around me paying $30/hour with benefits to run CNC machines. They'll even pay for your training. But, nobody wants to work in a factory.
I don't get it. Why the hell not? I did. Work in a factory, I mean. I'm currently working from home as a consultant, with sounds cushy if you ignore all the years of sweat and long hours and travel that led up to it. Where did we as a workforce get the idea that we're just handed cushy jobs without having to put in the sweat first?
Re: (Score:2)
Where did we as a workforce get the idea that we're just handed cushy jobs without having to put in the sweat first?
From employers who don't give raises except to new hires
I think you're mixing two different things. A company that doesn't give raises tends not to across the board, excepting perhaps the execs. I think what you're referring to is offering new hires more than the current hires are making for the same position. As in, you could technically quit and then get rehired at the same company for more money. That *does* happen, but back when you got hired, it probably happened to you too, in comparison to the people who had been working there for a while. And someti
Re: (Score:2)
And most of those shops skimp on safety - like Rivian, whose shop is pure fucking hell, welders have no ventilation or safety respiration gear.
Nobody wants to work in a factory because safety regulations don't get fucking enforced.
CNC (Score:2)
Not sure how running a CNC is hell. You put the stock in. It runs. You pull the part out. You run it against a wheel brush for a few seconds. I helped my friend run one a few times. It's fun.
These are jobs shops, not forges.
"Contractors" ah... that was the detail. (Score:2)
I wondered why every company doesn't just fire all the union people to get rid of them. In this case they're not employees of the company doing the firing. I'll bet their contract allowed Google to fire them "at will".
Otherwise stuff like this should apply (and I assume prevent such an obvious "kill the union" tactic)...
https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlr... [nlrb.gov]
"Interfering with employee rights (Section 7 & 8(a)(1))
Employees have the right to unionize, to join together to advance their interests as employees,
The sociopath way of doing business (Score:3)
This is the sociopath way of doing business. This is a bad practice and its only favored because business today is full of sociopaths that do this type of thing. This is not going to save Google or other Tech companies when the time comes. As it is clear that current status is not going to last forever and this companies are going to end one day.
Let's stop using Google products until they change (Score:2, Informative)
Support these workers with your wallet. There are plenty of alternatives to Google [restoreprivacy.com]'s offerings.
Contractors (Score:2)
They don't actually work for google at all. Their company does.
They have no rights at all or recourse...this is generally understood when outsourcing to work to subcontracts.
They were fucking morons for going to the city council in the first place. Even more so for saying the word 'google' at any time in the discourse. They work for a sub-par shitstain company, that hires other shitstains, to do shitstain work. As a subcontractor you can be removed without cause, or even for cause - like the cause of "I h
Re: (Score:2)
That Austin residents went to their city council to complain about their employer tells me all I need to know about folks in Austin. I just can't understand the thought process that has one treating their city council as if it were their employer's HR department...
Re: (Score:2)
I would guess that the city offers some sort of tax incentive to the company and that they were leveraging against that.
I would also guess that the primary purpose was to be at a public forum to get attention (which they did). Thought that does make me very suspicious as to the timing of when they were fired. That feels very staged.
A predictable ending, perhaps? (Score:2)
So they folded up the business unit. If Google and Cognizant were ruled to be co-employers of the workers, it sounds like they, perhaps, will get a severance payment partially shouldered by Google. Remains to be seen how all that plays out, of course. But given the trend to layoffs in the industry over the last few years, I don't know how much larger of a target you could possibly have painted on your backs.
I'm not saying anybody should roll over and take abuse. Far from it. But when you've chosen the hill
Key word: Contractors (Score:4, Informative)
That's the trade-off when you choose 1099 work over W-2 employment. As a contractor you get more freedom and independence on the job, ease of switching to new things if you get bored somewhere, and a significantly higher hourly rate than a full-time employee would earn doing similar work; plus overtime if you go past 8/40, which employees also don't get. And if you have a critical skill that the company needs now, Now, NOW; you can make a ton of money in a short time by building or fixing their stuff in a crisis. The downside is that, not being a full-time employee, you have less job security. Unions typically don't even want you on the site, much less in the union (Which makes this a *VERY* odd story.). You don't get the ISOs or RSUs that an employee gets. And you don't get the benefits package either.
It's not for everybody. Personally, while I've done some contracting in the past, I prefer regular FTE work. But it's not as if you don't know what you're getting into when you choose to go the 1099 route.
As a contractor, you're expendable.... (Score:2)
Nope. Supreme Court says Unions have rights (Score:5, Informative)
That's why the American constitution is incomplete, it should (also) include the freedom of association and assembly, which will includes unionization. With the present Trumpian superior court it will not get fixed.
Untrue. The present Supreme Court has upheld the rights of Unions. For example that all groups of people. whether employees, unions, special interest groups, etc all have the same collective right to free speech. Its seems that Constitutionally, according to the current Supreme Court and now its precedent, a Union has the same rights as any other association.
Re: (Score:2)
Its seems that Constitutionally, according to the current Supreme Court and now its precedent, a Union has the same rights as any other association.
Who cares? Nobody can trust that they (the supreme court (no capitalization)) made the decision legitimately. They literally do not matter anymore. This will not end well.
Re: (Score:2)
Its seems that Constitutionally, according to the current Supreme Court and now its precedent, a Union has the same rights as any other association.
Who cares? Nobody can trust that they (the supreme court (no capitalization)) made the decision legitimately. They literally do not matter anymore. This will not end well.
Actually if you read their decisions they explain why they ruled one way or the other, and these explanation do seem legitimate. You are confusing whether you politically like a decision with whether it was correct or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually if you read their decisions they explain why they ruled one way or the other ...
Actually, I do not have the wherewithal to do that. I am not trained in the subtleties of legal diction. I am going on the only thing I am capable of using: Thought. Once a person has lied to you, do you then trust everything else they say? Fuck no. Same with the Supreme Court. We have gross violations of conduct going on but they are swept aside because "actually, there is no rule about it". The rest of the Federal Government has rules about the appearance of impropriety. These guys not only embraced the a
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, but is a very shaky argument to assign individual rights to a group. If it would really work we would not so often hear of companies (Tesla, Amazon?) opposing or thwarting unionization.
A group of people advocate for a union, a group of people advocate against a union. Who wins is whoever have the better argument for those who are going to vote.
For the record, I've seen small shops unionize and be materially worse off afterwords. Left looking forward to the end of the lockout period that prevents them from voting again, Now they want to leave the union.
I've had old timers, 40+ year union members, explain how unions are no longer needed. That the important things that unions once foug
Re: (Score:2)
One of the great things a union can do is to stand for the individual that gets in a conflict with a financially much stronger employer, most employees can never afford the type of legal support a company can.
Re: (Score:2)
The important things unions can fight for change as our society changes and not everything will be covered by law. One of the great things a union can do is to stand for the individual that gets in a conflict with a financially much stronger employer, most employees can never afford the type of legal support a company can.
Which they don't do. They stand for protecting the rights and finances of the union leadership. They are just a "rocket" for making money and attaining political power, and have been so for many decades. Again, this is the perspective of men who respect and are grate for the unions of 100 years ago, who spent decades in these unions and witnessed their decline from the 1950s onward. Regular union worker.
Re: (Score:2)
Companies have been breaking those laws, or having them repealed/rolled back at every opportunity since then, including within the last year. It was in the headlines about child labor, wage theft, etc etc all reported (ironically) by the google news aggregator.
Meaningless without details. Child labor could mean anything, like your kids working in your store, your restaurant, your farm, etc. Wage theft could mean anything, server having to share tips with dishwasher, etc. :-) }
Don't need citation, I'll take your word on details. { I'll probably regret that
Re: A problem with the US constitution (Score:4, Insightful)
Thatâ(TM)s the great part about freedom of association. It also means freedom to NOT associate with somebody. Such as people belonging to a union.
Re:$19 an hour (Score:5, Insightful)
Price (Score:2)
You can buy a nice house about 30 miles northeast of mine for 1/4th the price. It would be a well built house in a nice neighborhood with good schools. There are even plenty of jobs available. Most people used to urban or suburban areas would consider it to be in the "middle of nowhere."
There is plenty of housing available, just not where people would prefer to live.
Re: (Score:2)
Citation?
Re: (Score:2)
Oddly, landlords can still find renters, so people can gnash their teeth and complain that "the rent is too damn high" but I'm not seeing buildings full of empty apartments, someone is renting these apartments.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Price of rent and goods is pretty much completely decoupled from wages at this point.
There are tens of millions of disenfranchised people in the United States of America. Probably even more than 100 million. Having a third of your population with nothing left to lose is a dangerous position to be in; especially one that has the concepts of Freedom written into its Founding Documents.
Re:$19 an hour (Score:4, Insightful)
Majorities of Democrats (67%), independents (57%) favor building more housing in their neighborhoods. A slim majority (52%) of Republicans also favor more construction in their neighborhoods, while 46% oppose. Republicansâ(TM) more tepid support is notable because constraints on construction often come from government zoning restrictions. Yet Republicans typically are more skeptical of government regulation. The fact that Republicans are more likely to own homes may have something to do with it.
And this is from the Cato Institute. I guess we found out who is the BS master.
Re:$19 an hour (Score:5, Insightful)
3. The more you unionize, it may look like you're getting a bigger paycheck but the more unaffordable you will make things as the price of homes and goods/services will increase far more than your wages. Ask yourself would you want your wage to go up 2X if it meant that the price of everything such as rent and food went up 4X? Furthermore, you will only cause more automation and offshoring. Don't purchase temporary feel-good at the price of long term disaster.
Folks this is what Kool Aid does.
Re: (Score:2)
Funny thing about it is, all that shit happened anyway, regardless of unions. Its like the delusional assholes who think there is no motivation to get ahead in Russia because you won't make any more, when there are factory workers right here and now in America who have spent decades living on $12 an hour with no bennies. I have actually witnessed that conversation in person, several times.
Re:$19 an hour (Score:5, Insightful)
No one gets paid what they deserve.
Everyone gets paid -exactly- what they are worth. By definition.
Only in a free market situation. Which Google is not subject to, being a large politically-connected monopoly.
Re:$19 an hour (Score:5, Insightful)
In a free market situation, both parties would have equal knowledge and negotiating power. Unions provide this for workers. Otherwise you peons will get whatever the employer thinks they can get away with. Source: decades upon decades of lived experience by millions including myself. Education and qualifications/experience had zero to do with it.
Re: (Score:2)
https://i.etsystatic.com/35206... [etsystatic.com]
Re: (Score:2)
They are, actually. Only housing is expensive if you rent or are buying a new home. And cars have gotten more expensive (but more features too though). .. or
How much was a cell phone in the 1950s? Nobody even had one.
How much was a computer? Uh, a million dollars for something with less power than a TI-35 calculator?
Even things like fridges were more unaffordable. A state of the art fridge cost $200 back then which inflation adjusted is like $1800. You can buy a fridge with the 1950s features for $300 today
Re: (Score:2)
These are all 'technology / manufactured goods' which of course get cheaper over time as technology gets better.
Plenty of other things now are more expensive / unaffordable and most of these are very big things that count:..
Healthcare, education, housing..etc and autos (as mentioned).
Then there are the things that have been taken away since then.. like pensions, retirement benefits, 'right to disconnect' when you get home from work each day, reasonable working hours (which are getting less each year)...etc.
Re: (Score:2)
If manufactured goods "get cheaper over time" how come the things that rely on union labor got more expensive?
Re: $19 an hour (Score:3)
Manufactured goods get cheaper to make over time (in general). How much they sell for is another matter.
Re:Don't be evil. (Score:5, Informative)