• Someone64@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Well it doesn’t mean what it used to anymore. Now you just pay for a subscription and you get it. Hell, I don’t know why you ever thought the check mark pre-Musk ever meant anything other than somebody’s identity being verified as true judging by what you’re saying… Never meant that their opinions were Twitter approved or whatever.

      • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        The blue check went through some twists and turns. Originally it was meant as “your identity is verified”, then it became a status symbol, then it had extra features attached to it. At one point the people approving them were literally taking bribes to expedite or guarantee your blue check (like personal bribes, not a payment to Twitter). And at some point along the way it somehow became a “Twitter approves” thing, because at least one person had their blue check stripped for going too far as a right wing troll (Milo Yianno-whatever). All of that pre-Muak.

        Post-Musk, it’s just a subscription you pay for with some extra features and there’s now a different checkmark for corporate or government entities that merely verifies their identity.

  • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    2 days ago

    When somebody insists, “X doesn’t matter because my salary depends on X,” it’s time to stop beating your head against a wall to teach them anything.

    • Alaknár@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Nah, nah, you see - I had an excellent breakfast today. Clearly that means world hunger doesn’t exist! Checkmate, leftist!

  • BullishUtensil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    2 days ago

    There are two schools of thought:

    Those who want as good life as possible, and Those who want to have a better life than everyone else, no matter what.

  • Gammelfisch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    3 days ago

    Net income is a small factor. One should compare the total package because the unions are usually way ahead of the non-union.

    • unphazed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      My company was spread across 3 unions. 1 and 2 got decent healthcare. 3 got a $1000 signing bonus. I hear they like pizza parties.

    • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      My union gives me benefits that are included in my $30/month dues and I’m not even full time.

  • auginator@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    2 days ago

    I got higher at position as senior. But It wasn’t until I was able to join the Union that my income doubled. Year before I joined like in 2007 manager gave me a .10 raise. This shit is real.

  • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    This doesn’t even need to be in your contract. When union shops get a raise, non-union shops either have to compete, or lose their best labour.

  • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    36
    ·
    3 days ago

    Who negotiated for Cathy? She didn’t need collective bargaining, she needed to learn to stand up for herself - as every worker should.

    • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Individual workers do not have the leverage to “stand up for themselves,” they just get knocked down. In all likelyhood, this was just the contract that Cathy was offered.

      • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        3 days ago

        Their leverage is their value to the company. If you’re not capable of providing more than minimum value for your employer, then why should you work for that company? Find a company you can do more for.

        • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 days ago

          That’s not much leverage when there are many, many, people who need work to to live. Against a lone laborer, management holds almost all the cards. There’s always someone more desperate.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          If you’re not capable of providing more than minimum value for your employer, then why should you work for that company? Find a company you can do more for.

          Are you for real? “Find a company you can do more for”? Fuck that. More like:

          If your employer can’t pay you more than the minimum for the value of your work, then why should you work for that company? Find a company that will pay you for the value of your work.

          Why would I ever do more work than what I’m being compensated for?

          Not all of us “live to work.” There’s more to life than your job.

    • Match!!@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      ·
      3 days ago

      “who negotiated for Cathy” well if her contract is pegged to union pay then the union negotiates for cathy

    • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      poe’s law is real. Can’t tell if unmarked joke, or just doesn’t know anything about the history of labor or what.

  • mumblerfish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    3 days ago

    This is what Swedish unions did even more directly. A company hired labour from Latvia I think it was. The union showed up and said that thats all fine, but you have to pay them properly. None of them were members. They picketed the company for the sake of non-members wages. Why? To avoid social dumping down the line.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      The BLS data has historically been a method by which capitalists measured and managed labor power as a fungible resource. It has historically been a tool of capital to evaluate the influence of policy on labor, not a tool of labor to pressure capital for concessions.

      Not to say the information isn’t valuable on its face. But it should be worth recognizing that we are looking at autocannibalization of capital. The people most injured by dismantling the BLS are the people who do the bulk of the hiring, not the people being hired.

  • pyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    115
    ·
    3 days ago

    “your statistic is false because I have an anecdote” is literally the entire basis of the conservative understanding of science.

    union workers don’t make more on average because I earn half a dollar more.

    global warming isn’t happening because I brought a snowball.

    vaccines cause death because my friend walked out of a clinic after a shot and got hit by a self driving tesla.

    • Brave Little Hitachi Wand@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 days ago

      It really is a kind of solipsism, emotional immaturity as a self-justifying worldview. Problems don’t exist until they impact me personally, repeat and nauseam.

    • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      vaccines cause death because my friend walked out of a clinic after a shot and got hit by a self driving tesla.

      😂

    • SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      “conservative understanding”
      Sounds like all conservatives are idiots or rather idiots are the ones who are politically conservative.

      • pyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        it’s both. conservatism is both appealing to stupid people and it compounds stupidity.

    • Jerkface (any/all)@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I can continue to eat things that kill me because I take statins that reduce my chance of heart attack by a couple percent.