▲ 960 ▼ Which CEOs are actually worth keeping around? (i.imgur.com) submitted 2 years ago by TehBamski@lemmy.world to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world 412 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] satanmat@lemmy.world 52 points 2 years ago (3 children) Also. I believe, he also said , if the workers think they need a union, we’ve failed as managers. So. Yeah permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Arbiter@lemmy.world 42 points 2 years ago (1 child) I mean, it’s an understandable viewpoint. It’s when union busting tactics are being brought in that things are problematic. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 3 points 2 years ago That's because you view it entirely positively, instead of from the angle that he doesn't want them to even know of the possibility. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago (3 children) I wish more companies had this mindset. If you treat your employees well and listen to their needs, they won't need to unionize. When they do unionize, it means they don't feel that they have been treated well and listened to. It seems that the end result of this philosophy would be to treat your employees well! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] kiterios@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago If you have an employer that does the right thing, you should have a union that doesn't need to do much. But you should still unionise, because it's niave to think the company will always continue to behave that way. If anything, they naturally drift away from that state and it's only a matter of time until it changes. The union is about having a level playing field with the company when you need it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bufalo1973@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago* Unionize it's not only about raising your working conditions. It's about helping other to raise theirs. If you have better conditions you can tell other business owners that what the Union is asking, you already have it. One less point where they can grab themselves. permalink fedilink source parent [–] lime@feddit.nu 3 points 2 years ago its an interesting difference in perspective for sure. here you join as a matter of course because you can push back against changes that are bad. permalink fedilink source parent [–] laurelraven@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 years ago To be fair, he's not really wrong, meaning that they've failed to take good enough care of their people, and my understanding is he didn't stand in the way of one forming... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Arbiter@lemmy.world 42 points 2 years ago (1 child) I mean, it’s an understandable viewpoint. It’s when union busting tactics are being brought in that things are problematic. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 3 points 2 years ago That's because you view it entirely positively, instead of from the angle that he doesn't want them to even know of the possibility. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 3 points 2 years ago That's because you view it entirely positively, instead of from the angle that he doesn't want them to even know of the possibility. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago (3 children) I wish more companies had this mindset. If you treat your employees well and listen to their needs, they won't need to unionize. When they do unionize, it means they don't feel that they have been treated well and listened to. It seems that the end result of this philosophy would be to treat your employees well! permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] kiterios@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago If you have an employer that does the right thing, you should have a union that doesn't need to do much. But you should still unionise, because it's niave to think the company will always continue to behave that way. If anything, they naturally drift away from that state and it's only a matter of time until it changes. The union is about having a level playing field with the company when you need it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] bufalo1973@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago* Unionize it's not only about raising your working conditions. It's about helping other to raise theirs. If you have better conditions you can tell other business owners that what the Union is asking, you already have it. One less point where they can grab themselves. permalink fedilink source parent [–] lime@feddit.nu 3 points 2 years ago its an interesting difference in perspective for sure. here you join as a matter of course because you can push back against changes that are bad. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kiterios@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago If you have an employer that does the right thing, you should have a union that doesn't need to do much. But you should still unionise, because it's niave to think the company will always continue to behave that way. If anything, they naturally drift away from that state and it's only a matter of time until it changes. The union is about having a level playing field with the company when you need it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bufalo1973@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago* Unionize it's not only about raising your working conditions. It's about helping other to raise theirs. If you have better conditions you can tell other business owners that what the Union is asking, you already have it. One less point where they can grab themselves. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lime@feddit.nu 3 points 2 years ago its an interesting difference in perspective for sure. here you join as a matter of course because you can push back against changes that are bad. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] laurelraven@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 years ago To be fair, he's not really wrong, meaning that they've failed to take good enough care of their people, and my understanding is he didn't stand in the way of one forming... permalink fedilink source parent
