635

submitted 1 year ago by RothyBuyak@lemmy.blahaj.zone to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 18 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] drailin@kbin.social 28 points 1 year ago

Cries in Texas Graduate Student who is legally prevented from unionizing 🫠

Having to petition my university for basic considerations (not owing back tution to the university despite being employed by them, getting health care covered, getting pay raises so we can afford to live where we work) has been hell without any union support.

Fuck Texas, can't wait to finish up here and move.

[-] IndiBrony@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Fuck it, unionize anyway? 🤷🏼‍♂️

[-] 520@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The union being made illegal means the uni has no obligation to listen
They can be sued for making the union, and the lawsuit will probably be successful.
Any union action will be met with a probably-successful lawsuit.

Best thing they can do is find another job and quit.

[-] drailin@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

Yep. Current me would have told younger me to get the fuck out and go to a different grad school literally anywhere else. I now tell that to prospective graduate students whenever I meet with them.

[-] drailin@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

I agree, but my peers don't despite my attempts to convince them (out of a sense of fear mostly, not aversion to the idea, as is often the case). Many are international students at my school and the state uses that as a cudgel for union breaking, as the law demolishes their immigrant worker/student status that relies on their position if they were to unionize.

Through a tremendous amount of effort, my boss and I have leveraged every ounce of pressure we have on the university administration to give us these necessary improvements to success, with full insurance coverage coming this fall.

Still fucking sucks that we basicallly had to rely on the support of the professors to make this a reality. It would be nice if that solidarity was affirmed by collective bargaining

[-] Purplexingg@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

How does that work? I'm a federal employee in a union. You figure if the feds can so can state employees

[-] drailin@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

It is literally just state gov employees in TX that are barred from unionizing, I shit you not. We have no worker protections when it comes to any element of collective bargaining. The state can terminate our contracts as punishment for doing so. Even teachers here aren't allowed to. Unsurprisingly, pigs (and firefighters too for optics I guess) are the only state employees allowed to unionize.

This includes political subdivisions of the state, so county/city employees are also barred.

[-] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Wow. Where I live we have the AUPE, which is the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees, which is literally a union for employees of the province (as stated in the name).

I’ve never been a part of it so I’m can’t make any claims to their effectiveness, but I know a lot of dumb people who make complaints about overpaid government workers.

Like no. They’re not overpaid, you’re underpaid.

[-] metaStatic@kbin.social 24 points 1 year ago

my employer tried to screw me out of a few hours pay, not enough for most people to chase down, the union chased them until they fucking paid me. it more than paid my Union dues for the year.

[-] RQG@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Now imagine an employee trying to skip a few hours of work while still getting paid. It's the reverse scenario but suddenly it's so much worse?

[-] Fibby@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 year ago

If an employee is trying to skip hours, their manager has power over them. The manager can fire them, cut hours, or dock pay.

If a manager is trying to skimp pay, they still have power over the employee. The employee cannot make demands to the manager because they have no leverage.

But if all the employees join together? Now they have collective bargaining. This is what unions are for. Its to try and balance the inherent power imbalance.

[-] anothercatgirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 year ago

The difference is livelihood versus profits. One of the sums of money pays rent, utilities, food, while the other sum of money pays stockholders dividends.

[-] Fibby@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

I understand the sentiment, but this isn't always true. Some workers need unions while working for non-profit companies.

The difference is more to do with the power imbalance between workers and managers.

[-] MyFairJulia@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Corpo: "Why unionize and pay dues when you can buy a Playstation 5?"

Some worker: (can't afford a Playstation 5 in 10 years)

[-] Mongostein@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

With the union wage increase you can buy 4 PS5s and still pay your dues

[-] MyFairJulia@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I mean way higher wages would give my workers much more financial flexibility and if everyone did it, there would be much more money in circulation and thus the economy would thrive.

AND THERE'S NO WAY IN HELL I'M GONNA AGREE TO THAT!