They also have the option of not treating them like shit. Happy workers don’t usually want to unionize.
Hyggyldy@sffa.community 1 year ago
What’s crazy is I hear unionization is usually more expensive to fight against, but these CEO’s are essentially morally opposed to it. Every time I hear stories of these people their lives would have been so much easier and their businesses more profitable but they just cannot stand people unionizing.
phillaholic@lemm.ee 1 year ago
captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Yeah it’s because it flies in the face of their hierarchy
Custoslibera@lemmy.world 1 year ago
That’s weirdest part, at this point the hoops Amazon has jumped through vs how profitable of a company they are - it must be cheaper for them to just let people unionise and pay them more + give better conditions?
SJ0@lemmy.fbxl.net 1 year ago
Do you want to pay people more because they’re better at their job or do you want to pay people more because they’ve been warming a chair longer than anyone else?
Hyggyldy@sffa.community 1 year ago
I really don’t care to play “who deserves a minimum quality of life”.
SJ0@lemmy.fbxl.net 1 year ago
Reality doesn’t care whether you care to play or not.
There’s a limited amount of resources, you can’t hire everyone on Earth, you can’t give everyone an unlimited salary. Everything past that you’re making decisions as to who gets what.
And by the way, if you make enough poor decisions eventually everyone loses their jobs.
dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Or because people need more to make a living? The whole argument of “it’s a shitty job and shouldn’t be used to support you” doesn’t really work anymore.
SJ0@lemmy.fbxl.net 1 year ago
That doesn’t have anything to do with what I said.
gibmiser@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Well basically it means they have to actually negotiate with their workers via unions. That’s almost like work. They prefer not to have to do anything to “earn” their billions.