• Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    They’re trying a new strike strategy that plays the companies against one another. By rewarding companies when they play ball they can allow them to get a potential leg up on their compeition who maybe decided against a particular thing.

    It allows the union to better pressure the companies and allows the union strike funds to go further. It’s a novel approach, and is working so far. Hopefully it will bear fruit.

      • Sunforged@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        They have enough in their strike fund for an all out strike for 10 months. How long do you think these negotiations should be stretched out?

        • Stovetop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          Until they get exactly what they ask for.

          Could they hurt the corporations more? Sure. But it’s pragmatic, really. If they’re getting what they want, no need to make it a bigger, more expensive thing than it needs to be.

        • tsz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          This kind of ridiculous black and white opinion that completely ignores the reality of the situation and the goals of the groups involved has become way too prevalent on here. All it says to me is that you have no legitimate experience working, losing money, or for that matter, striking. I’m so sick of lemmy and these attitudes. Just calm the fuck down and think before you speak. You are contributing to the dumbest echo chamber I have ever seen. You’re out of touch with reality. Grow up.

          • Sunforged@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            My opinion are based on what works for labor rights. A pragmatic “lets not hurt the business” approach hasn’t worked for the past 4 decades.

            Having union members continue to work during this partial strike is only giving the big 3 more time to lay off workers. Fain has sold this as a positive, saying those laid off can claim unemployment instead of pulling from the strike fund. There are alot of problems with this, there is little support for laid of members to navigate claiming unemployment, with every state having different requirements it’s left many confused on where they stand with the strike and union. Also UAW has one of the biggest strike coffers in the country, at this time of unprecedented labor support they need to use that and go all out. That’s how the writers guild just got their unprecedented win last week, and most of those writers are still out on the picket lines in solidarity with the SAG, as a united front.

            I’ve been hopeful of Fain’s approach but it’s doing more harm than good within the union, when members were ready to stand together they were instead left as confused as the big 3 were, which if you’re just looking at dollars in the bank was a win I guess, but moral is more important. Again they are not hurting in their strike fund, this is not a newly formed union it’s one of the oldest.

        • jonne@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          They don’t have to spend it all, you know. If they can reward corporations for negotiating in good faith by limiting the damage of the strike, they’re retaining leverage. They can still go full strike later, but it looks like it’s not necessary.

          I’m sure the UAW knows what they’re doing.

          Besides, if they were to hurt the corporations too much, they’ll end up hurting sales of American cars, giving foreign competitors inroads. China’s car workers aren’t unionised, so importing those cars hurts unions everywhere.

          • Sunforged@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            $825,000,000 in the current strike fund. 400,000 current active members. I’m not sure what the contract length is so let’s say 4 years, that’s a minimun.

            $825,000,000 ÷ 4 years ÷ 12 months ÷ 400,000 members = 42.96 per month per member to rebuild the fund for the next contract.

            That is not to mention the current fight is an existential one for the union. As EV funding coming from the state has all gone to none union shops, it has hurt the unions strength. Part of this current fight is to demand expansion of the union to EV shops, growing that member number and preventing the union from becoming irrelevant.

            • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Are you providing information from actual sources, or just speculating from your own calculations?

              • Sunforged@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                You asked for the math. I provided you the numbers, if you don’t trust me go check. It’s frustrating that I put time into looking up my response only to be met by skepticism.

                • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I was asking for information that could be sourced. Math cannot tell you which decisions someone else has made or which practices have been adopted.

    • Sunforged@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I understand what the goal is and the theory behind it. The thing is the strike fund has enough funds for an all out strike that is 10 months long. That would be billions lost for the big three if they wanted to try to outlast the union, not to mention fund raising the union could do to extend it if needed.

      Easing the strike up this week because one came to the table isn’t great. With only 17% striking, that leaves 83% working without a contract, that’s a big problem especially if this approach is going to be a drawn out process.

      • Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        Elsewhere they have pointed out that the rotating strikes allow the still working members to inform on attempts to move production around the strikes, and move the strikes in kind.

        That has resulted in Ford giving some big concessions.

        • Sunforged@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          I have been following this strike very closely, I understand the theory behind it. Do you know what is more costly to the big three than forcing a shell game? A full on strike.

          Shawn Fain wants to eat the rich? Hit them hard and make them hurt. Three weeks of gamesmanship is enough. You want the big three to play off each other? Full strike until all three come to the same agreement.