• OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    What I’m saying is that if they can set “$0.50 above union rates” as the company policy for everyone, they can also set “$5 above union rates” as the company policy for everyone and then cut union rates by $5. It’s essentially just bribing people to not join a union or penalizing them if they do. It being company policy for everyone is irrelevant.

    • lime!
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      sure, but whether or not they know it they have caved to the union’s demands by doing that

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        What kind of 5th dimensional chess are you trying to play where penalizing someone for joining a union is “caving to the union’s demands?”

        • lime!
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          if salaries depend on union decisions then surely they are following the union’s demands.

          i think the thing that makes it confusing is the missing context of whether unionised workers at that site are being paid less than non-union workers. i assumed the answer was no because it sounded like they had a CBA that the person was not aware of, since the alternative would have been immediately struck down by any union worth its salt.