Cant they just all collectivly go on strike? There was no such thing as agreements when unions started.
this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2025
232 points (100.0% liked)
politics
25147 readers
2070 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[gestures broadly to Regan and the ATC strike]
Yeah, but thats just air traffic control. The situation is also very different now with DOGE eliminating any trust in job stability, and many looking for a way out anyeays since the perks of working as a fed are erroding anyways. They simply cant fire everyone, because they already fired too many people.
Regan was able to backfill the controllers with the military in the interim. Thats simply not possible for every job that exists in the government.
The alternative is to give up on unions altogether because if they have no teeth then there is no point paying dues.
That's exactly what they want, a massive strike that they can blame for all the economic problems caused by bad management. Trump wants to pretend that he's running the country like a business, but he has the goldenest of parachutes. So he will crash the country into a depression and say "see? this is why unions are a problem."
Oh no if we fight back that's exactly what they want!
The only solution is to do nothing and let them do what they want!
Fuck no, that's not at all what I'm suggesting. Unions need to fight, and strikes are usually the best form of leverage the worker has. Strike, certainly, but remember that your opponent is not the President or this administration. Trump wants this because he thinks it will help him. But if we are prepared for the spin, and reject the lies, then it will not help him. If he receives his fair share of the blame, it will be an albatross around his neck.
remember that your opponent is not the President or this administration
who would you say that the opponent is? they certainly would seem to qualify as prime among opponents
The oligarchy. Trump is a symptom of the same disease, but he's hardly the cause of it. Workers aren't negotiating with Trump, and the President does not dictate wages. He wants to instigate a strike, or any chaos really, because he thinks it will help him politically. It will create a scapegoat he can blame for the problems he's causing, and it will distract from his numerous scandals related to him being a serial child rapist.
The .01% and their sycophants are the opponent.
uh, so we're still talking about the same people. that's folk with an annual income of 7 million or higher.
And then the true nazi-style scapegoating will go in full swing
Really following the playbook here
They could...
But then theyd all be fired and the government would pay 10x as much to a private company who pays their staff half as much.
There isnt a private company for every function of the goverment.
Yes
A federal appeals court on Friday had approved Mr. Trump’s order instructing agencies to end collective bargaining agreements — part of a sweeping effort to assert more control over the federal work force.
But the three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which allowed the order to proceed, did so in part because the Trump administration had directed agencies not to move ahead with the plan until the court battle was resolved. Because of that instruction, the judges wrote, there was a lower risk of harm to the unions and their members.
Thats some bullshit circular logic....
If that's the precedent then he can do anything as long as he says he'd wait for the ruling
They need to make the full appeals panel vote.
would someone tell the trump administration it's sexier if they make the union take it off slowly
it's really sexier if they leave it all on, but they might buy the analogy