all 3 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 40 points 5 months ago

They're winning all the way to the bank. Those costs are also tax deductible, so free government support to kill unions.

  • source
  • [–] 35 points 5 months ago

    $1.5B a year is such high ROI for them.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago

    Well yeah. I mean. In modern times you could say workers have been fighting this battle since the mid 1700s I think. And further back even ancient Rome had a shipbuilders guild that took care of its members. Everybody who's anybody knows unions are good for workers. And when everything you earn must be taken from others, that's a bit much to ask of today's billionaires

  • source
  • 4 comments in c/unions@sh.itjust.works view that post
    [–] 14 points 5 months ago

    That's just what we know about.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago

    Still less than paying your employees.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago

    Maybe that should be illegal.

    And I get hard to enforce, but driving it underground is likely a win.

  • source
  • 2 comments in c/latestagecapitalism@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 2 points 5 months ago

    The employees that work for these places should unionize.

    "We brought in the union busters, but they went on strike." Would be just 👌

  • source
  • 1 comment in c/hackernews@lemmy.bestiver.se view that post
    [–] 7 points 5 months ago

    Tale as old as time.

    The amount spent trying to not pay people more is usually more than if they just paid people more.

  • source