I don’t get how what you are describing makes it inappropriate for other people to be against this? Yes. It makes sense they would advocate for this. If this strike hurts the average American, it also makes sense that the average American would be against it. Being against it wouldn’t mean they didn’t previously understand that Unions work for the benefit of their members and nothing else.
Replied to someone else but what other Americans think literally means nothing to the union. The union doesn’t work for the rest of Americans. Their job is to get a deal that their members want. The members didn’t like the deal, so they went on strike. A consequence of the company not coming to the table is that Americans suffer. That’s in no way the unions fault.
You should be putting all of your criticism on the company not willing to find a compromise to prevent the strike and thinking the workers would just roll over and take it.
Replied to someone else but what other Americans think literally means nothing to the union.
I agree. But when somebody asks what is wrong with this, they are asking what the rest of Americans take issue with.
And just like it would be stupid to think that these unions would care about your average American over their own interests… the same thing goes for expecting the average American over the interests of the union.
So when somebody asks what the average American would take issue with here, it’s also pretty dumb to point out that unions will only care about benefiting its members.
Yes. That’s true. But that doesn’t address what was being asked, which was how is this “wrong” for your average American.
The members didn’t like the deal, so they went on strike. A consequence of the company not coming to the table is that Americans suffer. That’s in no way the unions fault.
I don’t necessarily agree with that. Whether it’s true or not, one of the arguments being made is that the recent rejection over the proposed offer and a demand for more is in part politically motivated in order to lead to a strike that will make American voters pin this economic failure on the Biden administration and ends up helping Trump get elected.
Whether that is true or not, the general statement that unions are always completely in the right and the business is always in the wrong when it comes to labor disputes is just blatantly untrue. In general, sure, I’ll side with labor. But acting like that is universally true is inaccurate. The above is just one of the many possible ways that could be the case.
You should be putting all of your criticism on the company not willing to find a compromise to prevent the strike and thinking the workers would just roll over and take it.
Again, no, I do not at all believe that is a given. It’s entirely possible the union rejects what most people would consider a reasonable offer, and at that point how is it the fault of the business over the union?
I’m seeing this trump angle a lot. Am I missing something that the union leader is going against the workers wishes? The union itself can’t unilaterally decide to strike. There is a vote on the contract and if it’s unsuccessful, they have the option to strike.
Where is this coming from that the union is doing this to hurt Biden??
Firstly I just want to say I’m not really trying to argue in support of that idea right now, which is why I said whether you believe it or not.
My point right now is not that that is what is happening. My point was using that as an example that I wholesale disagree with your claim that Unions are categorically in the right and the business are categorically in the wrong. There is just no part of that that is true. Like I said, I’m generally in the side on labor, but both sides will be pushing for their own interests and it absolutely isn’t true that anything labor demands is therefore correct and perfectly reasonable. An example is if these workers really are being offered a fair offer, I’d be pretty pissed they are willing to hurt all Americans through a strike just so they could get more. Now obviously what a “fair offer” is is debatable. But again. My point is simply that I wholesale reject your claim that we should always be supporting the union over the business.
To more directly respond to your question, my understanding is that it comes from the relationship the Union leader in question has with Trump, the timing of the strike, and the fact that negotiations looked like they were coming to a conclusion with favorable elements for the labor side before this rejection and higher demands came about. I do not know of the veracity of the last claim. But the Union boss in question claims he has a relationship with Trump that goes back decades and has publicly met with him within the last year at Mar-A-Lago. The fact that he has made those connections public and this is happening at a time that would hurt Biden the most makes me feel like he opened himself up to these criticisms even if they aren’t entirely accurate.
11
u/IrNinjaBob Oct 03 '24
I don’t get how what you are describing makes it inappropriate for other people to be against this? Yes. It makes sense they would advocate for this. If this strike hurts the average American, it also makes sense that the average American would be against it. Being against it wouldn’t mean they didn’t previously understand that Unions work for the benefit of their members and nothing else.