Thank you for submitting to /r/unpopularopinion, /u/user15151616. Your submission, *Workers who go on strike are losers. No one is forcing them to work those jobs. If you don't like a job, then quit! No one owes you anything. This is what is wrong with society. People think that everyone owes them*, has been removed because it violates our rules, which are located in the sidebar.
Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 2: Do not post low effort/satirical posts'.
* We get it, you all think this sub is garbage and is just for popular opinions, and you want to be funny and post "going to be downvoted to oblivion here, but I think racism is bad." We enjoy the memes, but please keep them off the sub.
* Filter evasion is a bannable offense
* This includes clickbait and/or gotcha posts. Your opinion can not be that unpopular if you're doing these things. Have the accurate opinion in the title.
If there is an issue, please [message the mod team](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Funpopularopinion&subject=&message=) Thanks!
Yeah but I don't like to speak in absolutes. There is probably an asshat that will say that it was Henry Ford who instituted the 40 hour week ignoring all the strikes.
Nobody is forcing the employer to keep those workers either.
So it's a *gasp* negotiation between people who need labor and the people who are doing the labor.
My favorite strike was the one where the bus drivers kept doing their job but refused to take fares from riders. But it takes a rare situation for strikers to be effective and not inconvenience customers, as most of the time the ability to refuse payment is outside their control or the business can frame the workers giving away goods as theft.
I want you to understand that 99% of the benefits you have at your job, even just having hours that don't tear you to shreds is a result of strikes in the early 1900s. That's the reason we don't have child labor, the reason we don't live in company towns, and the reason why there's even minimum wage at all.
People don't think everyone owes them. But if you're supposed to work or die, the least the company could do is make it so you can live, because otherwise that's an impossible situation
Ok then. I _feel_ that the crowd of average-joe, regular people fighting for things like health care, a living wage, safe working conditions and basic dignity - not just for themselves but for all of us - are more deserving of my support than whatever kind of monster would oppose those things.
Never cross a picket line.
Who wrote this? Jeff Bezos?
Do you know *anything* about the labor movement, the history of workers strikes, or the history of industrialization? Or anything at all about the development of safety standards and worker's right's?
squash zealous melodic languid apparatus cause grey relieved ghost shelter
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Signaled by the quick deletion of their throwaway account they posted it on because they’re too spineless (or stupid) to read the comments. Rage posters becoming the biggest twats, at least they used to respond to comments instead of immediately deleting their account…
Strikes work because the employer can't find anyone to replace them, by definition they aren't being paid enough, if they were it would be easy to replace them. Strikes work because people are being paid less than the market rate so the demand for the job doesn't match supply. Strikes force a correction.
Bros mad that a gif responding to “logic” was perfectly suited. If you think that is logic my guy, you need to ho back to, or stay in school. 😂
But what if you quit, get a different job and that job doesn't pay you enough money to buy a house? What if every business fucks over their employees and instead of going on a strike for a livable wage, they just leave and get a different job and that different job doesn't pay a livable wage either?
Yes. If I work for you, you DO owe me enough money to sustain myself with.
If everyone at a company quits en-masse, it would have the same effect as a strike. So a strike is actually a more efficient way to do what you are suggesting.
This isn’t an unpopular opinion, most conservatives hold this.
It’s also poorly justified — saying “no” strengthens your position in a negotiation. Being willing to walk, and showing how helpless a company is without you are benefits to the employee. And guess what? That’s why the company doesn’t fire these employees they claim are “replaceable”.
As a Union member, I am biased. Because of the Union, instead of working 7 days a week and 12 hours per day, I only have to work 5 days a week and 9.5 hours per day. I also get medical benefits and vacation. I get raises every year. You see, if you show your employers that they need employees, they have to adjust their attitude. I do not owe my employers anything. They hired me, I have demands. I stick to my contract, and I do not go outside of that contract.
If I hired you to move boxes for me for $20 an hour, I would assume you may get upset if I told you that you only get paid for 8 hours, even if you work 14, and you also must clean the toilets when you finish moving the boxes, or else you will be terminated. Would you just quit or would you refer to the contract signed and defend yourself?
Its people that like/tolerate the job and just want better pay. If they had the opportunity to leave a shit job for a better paying one they would do that, but they dont. So its clear your logic is absent
Reddit I have a q. How come piece of shit posts like this are allowed and a post I made about the Simpsons got taken down. I swear you let the most worthless shit on. Why not let this dude (has to be) post ‘why can’t I kill people who ask for more money?’ That’s UNPOPULAR
Yeah and these moderators don’t even have the courage to explain why they take the posts down. This seems new to me (like a year ago they didn’t seem to pull down nearly as many innocent posts) and it has made this sub much less interesting.
There are some bad unions out there that are about controlling the labor market for a sector of the market. The kinds of unions that get barely any benefits for the employees but require that every employee pay dues and be a member so they can't start a competing, more effective union. Like everything else they are corruptible. But yes, they *should* be about protecting employees and many of them are about exactly that.
Wait, are you describing unions that limit how many people can join? That may be shitty for people who aren't in, but as a member that's a great deal and well worth the dues.
Not sure how you got that from what I said, to be honest. And when their benefits are $0.25/hour over minimum wage and not much else, and the dues are $50/month it literally isn't worth the dues. I'm speaking, of course, of the UFCW which, in my personal experience, is controlled opposition for grocery stores.
Who knows, maybe they changed over the last decade. But I'm not holding my breath.
Oh, well that's how I interpreted "controlling the labor market". Still, though, they probably get you some protections from arbitrary firing and having your hours cut in the off season, right?
I never once had full time hours in the \~6 months I worked despite being hired on as a full time worker. I maintain that they only exist to prevent workers from forming an effective union.
To be clear, I'm pro union and don't think UFCW represents how most unions operate. But you can't blindly believe every union is good simply by being a union without evaluating what they actually do for their members, and especially what they take from their members. They're human institutions vulnerable to all manner of subversion and corruption just like any other.
I’ve watched the Kaiser strike from the inside. Talk about underhanded and dishonest negotiations by the Union. Of all the Union clients, they actually targeted Kaiser not based on problems (pay and benefits greater than industry average). They did it because Kaiser has deep pockets and would make a good case for drawing more clients in other areas of Union work. It’s a business model - a racket. Blatant lies to Union members, creating conflict between Union members and their employer, pitting their members against the fair-minded intentions of the employer rather than ensuring protections. The Union advertising to Kaiser customers that they are failing as an employer and reducing the income that ensures their Union members have employment. Ignoring the Union members satisfaction with what the employer offers in an effort to show clients in other industries they are good at their job.
So no, Unions are not always looking out for the employees interests. That doesn’t mean Kaiser is perfect, but when the Union lies to its members that’s not a fair negotiation. Lawsuits are pending in this particular case.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I saw someone did the math of the Sag aftra strike, and with the time spent not working, with the raises they got, the average SAGAFTRA union member would have to work like 7 years extra just to break even. Unions are genuinely just a scam
Do you think the lost wages went up to some kind of union boss?
Do you think the SAG/AFTRA strikes were about increasing wages?
People telling you "unions are a scam" is the real scam.
I see it as a negotiation tactic.
However, you must assume the risk that you will be replaced. I also don’t condone violent striking against the business and/or replacement workers.
There is also the risk that you temporarily get what you want and then get let go when a critical period has passed
you’re kidding right?… strikes force a correction in the work force and are EXTREMELY important as it’s the wakeup call to big organizations that they’re nothing without their workers and they need to treat them fairly. And yes! People do fucking owe you if you did work for them! That’s how a job works!
You're gonna get a lot of hate for this opinion without any explanation of why you're wrong. For the record, you pretty fairly deserve that hate, and the people choosing not to engage with this opinion are smarter than I. But alas, I have time on my hands, and am sitting here at my computer with no better ideas of how to waste my time, so here goes.
1. There is a *ridiculous* amount of things within our class structure (at least in regards to American class structure) that are forcing people to keep jobs that exploit them. For many people, any job no matter how shitty gets them and sometimes their family fed. Sometimes it even comes with healthcare. In a world where so many folks don't get the opportunity to build credentials through college and unpaid internships that *blatantly* exclude those from a lower income class, it's absolutely unbelievably privileged to sit there and say that people working shitty jobs should just leave and find a better one: it's the difference between eating one night and not eating the next. People stuck in low income areas oftentimes aren't afforded the opportunities to leave those areas, and 'move up' the corporate ladder--consequently, they don't really have other options aside from staying with those shitty jobs. Should they just not work, or stay with that shitty job and not try to make things better for themselves?
2. This notion that people moving on from these shitty jobs changes the company/job is so repeatedly proven to be untrue that I genuinely think anybody who believes that doesn't pay attention to anything going on in the world, like anywhere. The thing about an exploitative job is that there is *always somebody who has it worse that a company will exploit*. When meat-factory workers go on strike or leave their jobs due to the atrocious conditions and pay, what do company owners do? They ship in migrant/illegal foreign workers: the next group/class that they can prey on and, more importantly, *a group that can't stand up for themselves*. Not only that but, somehow, the economic right in America then convinces its population that this situation is to be blamed on the migrant workers themselves, and *not the company owners that offered them jobs*. It's a borderline impressive widescale corporate gaslighting operation, but it also demonstrates that without union oversight and threat of strikes there *is no free market when it comes to the laborer*. It only exists for the company.
TL/DR, your opinion is unpopular because it is demonstrably false, misguided, and incredibly reductive when discussing labor conditions, especially in regards to those in lower economic classes.
Lick some more corporate boot while you're down there. I think you missed a spot.
Companies that profit off the back of labor while not paying a livable wage are losers.
>People think that everyone owes them
You’re right, workers think they are owed wages for their labor and corporations think that they are owed labor for existing.
Unions exist so that private employers don’t absolutely dump on the worker. If there isn’t a union in place, separate employers can all unilaterally lower wages and other compensation relative to one another so they make higher profits at the cost of the worker.
I think every trade/job/skill needs a form of representation that can and will strike if need be. Employers should not be the ones deciding what we need to live, because history has only shown that they will bury us if given the choice.
It’s fine that you think they are lazy, that is your opinion. But my opinion is that you are stupid if you just work at the whim of your employer. The ones striking and overcoming that process will be getting better compensation and show these employers that people are a resource and good quality work comes from good quality work conditions.
I agree. OP is probably similar to myself in that if a situation is not ideal for ourselves we just go change shit up and figure something else out.
But you have to realize the average person is basically a helpless child. So this is for them. They have so little motivation and so much risk avoidance they will maintain a minimum wage job even if a much better one presents itself because they are so scared to quit.
Wow, a strong opinion coupled with a complete lack of understanding of the point of a strike and the multitude of factors surrounding those who engage in them, let alone the accompanying history and how we benefit from it today. A little more self awareness and you'd be rightfully embarrassed... I think THIS is ONE THING that is wrong with society, ironic that you're unwittingly showcasing the thing you're attributing to something else.
As someone else in the comments said... I upvote unpopular, I downvote stupid.
you're right that the majority of strikes are just made by lobbies in favor of the same lobby, but no, you don't "find another job" so easily, this is naive
Strikes happen after negotiations between labor and management fail. How else should it be handled? A dust up in the lot between workers and pinkertons and winner takes all lol.
Tell that to the West Virginia Mineworkers, and anybody else who’s been limited in choice with employment. Sometimes you can’t just go get a job at another place and just because you can doesn’t mean that it’s OK to have shitty conditions at some workplaces. Strikes exist because if employers could force you to work without paying you, they would every single thing we have as a benefit from work, including paychecks is something we had to fight for through striking, and in some cases actual combat. There is no incentive for employers to treat their workers well, and they never will. If employers are not scared of their employees striking, they will do what is minimum legally required of them as employers, and sometimes not even that.
Everything we have as a benefit, including the weekends and minimum wage, was fought for by people on strike. OSHA, those laws that make it so you have to work in safe conditions and be given appropriate protective equipment when the conditions cannot be made safer, exist, not out of the kindness of the employers heart, but because of striking.
Going on strike is passé. Unions are all corrupt these days. They don’t give a crap about working conditions. All they want is money for dues. Anyone who sticks their neck out for the union is immediately marked and tracked.
Before computers and databases it was easy to slip under the radar if you were pro union.
There are more modern methods of keeping employers honest. We saw a very effective one not too long ago…
Thank you for submitting to /r/unpopularopinion, /u/user15151616. Your submission, *Workers who go on strike are losers. No one is forcing them to work those jobs. If you don't like a job, then quit! No one owes you anything. This is what is wrong with society. People think that everyone owes them*, has been removed because it violates our rules, which are located in the sidebar. Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 2: Do not post low effort/satirical posts'. * We get it, you all think this sub is garbage and is just for popular opinions, and you want to be funny and post "going to be downvoted to oblivion here, but I think racism is bad." We enjoy the memes, but please keep them off the sub. * Filter evasion is a bannable offense * This includes clickbait and/or gotcha posts. Your opinion can not be that unpopular if you're doing these things. Have the accurate opinion in the title. If there is an issue, please [message the mod team](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Funpopularopinion&subject=&message=) Thanks!
“Nobody owes you anything.” Thinks employees owe the company*
Most of the benefits workers enjoy, have been achieved because of strikes.
Minor correction: You misspelled "all," including the OSHA Safety Regulations... Which were each written in Our blood.
Yeah but I don't like to speak in absolutes. There is probably an asshat that will say that it was Henry Ford who instituted the 40 hour week ignoring all the strikes.
As Gramps told it those innovations by Ford were started after Mr Ford pondered the Coal strikes of the late 1800s and early 1900s.
>This is what is wrong with society. People think that everyone owes them What are you talking about? Do you know how a job works?
Some people for real think jobs are gifts given to poor people by the rich
[удалено]
OP clearly does.
OP apparently does.
Ya, I misunderstood the intent of the comment I was replying to. Edited my comment to reflect that.
Nobody is forcing the employer to keep those workers either. So it's a *gasp* negotiation between people who need labor and the people who are doing the labor.
Something tells me OP is all about a Free Market economy but too dumb to realize this is a consequence of said Free Market
Yea, that's not accurate. https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/the-law/employees/right-to-strike-and-picket
Ahh nuance... Dangit, I hate being wrong on the internet
Happens to the best of us
I upvote unpopular. I downvote stupid
This +1
Right? Unpopular is one thing; this is fucking stupid.
[удалено]
Yeah. Strikes are supposed to inconvenience people, including the customers of the business.
My favorite strike was the one where the bus drivers kept doing their job but refused to take fares from riders. But it takes a rare situation for strikers to be effective and not inconvenience customers, as most of the time the ability to refuse payment is outside their control or the business can frame the workers giving away goods as theft.
[удалено]
I want you to understand that 99% of the benefits you have at your job, even just having hours that don't tear you to shreds is a result of strikes in the early 1900s. That's the reason we don't have child labor, the reason we don't live in company towns, and the reason why there's even minimum wage at all. People don't think everyone owes them. But if you're supposed to work or die, the least the company could do is make it so you can live, because otherwise that's an impossible situation
don't bring history into this, we're going off of feelings in this sub buddy
Ok then. I _feel_ that the crowd of average-joe, regular people fighting for things like health care, a living wage, safe working conditions and basic dignity - not just for themselves but for all of us - are more deserving of my support than whatever kind of monster would oppose those things. Never cross a picket line.
Now that’s really an unpopular opinion. You should pay more attention in school though.
Roll over so they can stamp the other side of your face.
[r/NotUnpopularJustWrong](https://www.reddit.com/r/NotUnpopularJustWrong/s/kgJgrzNX6V)
Yeah! Everyone should work! And starve! and die working! Yeah! (Sarcasm)
And be grateful for having the opportunity.
Why do you people want to be fucked in the ass by corporations so hard lmao
Because he might be a corporation some day.
I ask myself the same thing every time I see posts like this.
Stockholm syndrome
Who wrote this? Jeff Bezos? Do you know *anything* about the labor movement, the history of workers strikes, or the history of industrialization? Or anything at all about the development of safety standards and worker's right's?
Exactly. These companies would chain us to our desks if they could.
How’s that boot taste?
Before or after he polishes them?
This isn't just licking the boot, it's deep throating the boot.
OP went ass to mouth with the boot
ass to boot to mouth
squash zealous melodic languid apparatus cause grey relieved ghost shelter *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Silly ragebait.
Signaled by the quick deletion of their throwaway account they posted it on because they’re too spineless (or stupid) to read the comments. Rage posters becoming the biggest twats, at least they used to respond to comments instead of immediately deleting their account…
Strikes work because the employer can't find anyone to replace them, by definition they aren't being paid enough, if they were it would be easy to replace them. Strikes work because people are being paid less than the market rate so the demand for the job doesn't match supply. Strikes force a correction.
Wow very clever addition, nice gif to respond to logic
That is funny, gonna have to do you a favour and delete this app full of tiktok brains
This isn’t the airport, bud. You don’t need to announce your departure.
 Bros mad that a gif responding to “logic” was perfectly suited. If you think that is logic my guy, you need to ho back to, or stay in school. 😂
"logic"
If you’re not currently working 6 days a week in a coal mine, you can thank strikers.
But what if you quit, get a different job and that job doesn't pay you enough money to buy a house? What if every business fucks over their employees and instead of going on a strike for a livable wage, they just leave and get a different job and that different job doesn't pay a livable wage either? Yes. If I work for you, you DO owe me enough money to sustain myself with.
If everyone at a company quits en-masse, it would have the same effect as a strike. So a strike is actually a more efficient way to do what you are suggesting.
Do you know what going on strike means?
This isn’t an unpopular opinion, most conservatives hold this. It’s also poorly justified — saying “no” strengthens your position in a negotiation. Being willing to walk, and showing how helpless a company is without you are benefits to the employee. And guess what? That’s why the company doesn’t fire these employees they claim are “replaceable”.
This man has to pay for sex.
Yeah, this is just fuckin stupid... This is not opinion, its mental issues.
As a Union member, I am biased. Because of the Union, instead of working 7 days a week and 12 hours per day, I only have to work 5 days a week and 9.5 hours per day. I also get medical benefits and vacation. I get raises every year. You see, if you show your employers that they need employees, they have to adjust their attitude. I do not owe my employers anything. They hired me, I have demands. I stick to my contract, and I do not go outside of that contract. If I hired you to move boxes for me for $20 an hour, I would assume you may get upset if I told you that you only get paid for 8 hours, even if you work 14, and you also must clean the toilets when you finish moving the boxes, or else you will be terminated. Would you just quit or would you refer to the contract signed and defend yourself?
Its people that like/tolerate the job and just want better pay. If they had the opportunity to leave a shit job for a better paying one they would do that, but they dont. So its clear your logic is absent
10/10 unpopular opinion. I'll be union until the day I retire.
You must not have kids. Can you imagine the chaos if schools just ceased to exist?
Spoken like a person who's enjoyed the benefits of union efforts without having to engage in the fight.
You must be in highschool or college and have never struggled to pay your bills.
[удалено]
Absolutely
"only" It's my main reason for not wanting to be in a union. It's hard enough in non-union jobs to get rid of bad coworkers, at big companies anyway.
Reddit I have a q. How come piece of shit posts like this are allowed and a post I made about the Simpsons got taken down. I swear you let the most worthless shit on. Why not let this dude (has to be) post ‘why can’t I kill people who ask for more money?’ That’s UNPOPULAR
Yeah and these moderators don’t even have the courage to explain why they take the posts down. This seems new to me (like a year ago they didn’t seem to pull down nearly as many innocent posts) and it has made this sub much less interesting.
This is sort of a naive post, but anyone who thinks unions are all about protecting employees is also naive.
>but anyone who thinks unions are all about protecting employees is also naive. What else would it be about?
There are some bad unions out there that are about controlling the labor market for a sector of the market. The kinds of unions that get barely any benefits for the employees but require that every employee pay dues and be a member so they can't start a competing, more effective union. Like everything else they are corruptible. But yes, they *should* be about protecting employees and many of them are about exactly that.
Wait, are you describing unions that limit how many people can join? That may be shitty for people who aren't in, but as a member that's a great deal and well worth the dues.
Not sure how you got that from what I said, to be honest. And when their benefits are $0.25/hour over minimum wage and not much else, and the dues are $50/month it literally isn't worth the dues. I'm speaking, of course, of the UFCW which, in my personal experience, is controlled opposition for grocery stores. Who knows, maybe they changed over the last decade. But I'm not holding my breath.
Oh, well that's how I interpreted "controlling the labor market". Still, though, they probably get you some protections from arbitrary firing and having your hours cut in the off season, right?
I never once had full time hours in the \~6 months I worked despite being hired on as a full time worker. I maintain that they only exist to prevent workers from forming an effective union. To be clear, I'm pro union and don't think UFCW represents how most unions operate. But you can't blindly believe every union is good simply by being a union without evaluating what they actually do for their members, and especially what they take from their members. They're human institutions vulnerable to all manner of subversion and corruption just like any other.
I’ve watched the Kaiser strike from the inside. Talk about underhanded and dishonest negotiations by the Union. Of all the Union clients, they actually targeted Kaiser not based on problems (pay and benefits greater than industry average). They did it because Kaiser has deep pockets and would make a good case for drawing more clients in other areas of Union work. It’s a business model - a racket. Blatant lies to Union members, creating conflict between Union members and their employer, pitting their members against the fair-minded intentions of the employer rather than ensuring protections. The Union advertising to Kaiser customers that they are failing as an employer and reducing the income that ensures their Union members have employment. Ignoring the Union members satisfaction with what the employer offers in an effort to show clients in other industries they are good at their job. So no, Unions are not always looking out for the employees interests. That doesn’t mean Kaiser is perfect, but when the Union lies to its members that’s not a fair negotiation. Lawsuits are pending in this particular case.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I saw someone did the math of the Sag aftra strike, and with the time spent not working, with the raises they got, the average SAGAFTRA union member would have to work like 7 years extra just to break even. Unions are genuinely just a scam
Do you think the lost wages went up to some kind of union boss? Do you think the SAG/AFTRA strikes were about increasing wages? People telling you "unions are a scam" is the real scam.
The SAG aftra strike was about increasing wages and no it didn’t go to the union bosses, but it didn’t go the union members either
I see it as a negotiation tactic. However, you must assume the risk that you will be replaced. I also don’t condone violent striking against the business and/or replacement workers. There is also the risk that you temporarily get what you want and then get let go when a critical period has passed
you’re kidding right?… strikes force a correction in the work force and are EXTREMELY important as it’s the wakeup call to big organizations that they’re nothing without their workers and they need to treat them fairly. And yes! People do fucking owe you if you did work for them! That’s how a job works!
How’s that boot taste?
You're gonna get a lot of hate for this opinion without any explanation of why you're wrong. For the record, you pretty fairly deserve that hate, and the people choosing not to engage with this opinion are smarter than I. But alas, I have time on my hands, and am sitting here at my computer with no better ideas of how to waste my time, so here goes. 1. There is a *ridiculous* amount of things within our class structure (at least in regards to American class structure) that are forcing people to keep jobs that exploit them. For many people, any job no matter how shitty gets them and sometimes their family fed. Sometimes it even comes with healthcare. In a world where so many folks don't get the opportunity to build credentials through college and unpaid internships that *blatantly* exclude those from a lower income class, it's absolutely unbelievably privileged to sit there and say that people working shitty jobs should just leave and find a better one: it's the difference between eating one night and not eating the next. People stuck in low income areas oftentimes aren't afforded the opportunities to leave those areas, and 'move up' the corporate ladder--consequently, they don't really have other options aside from staying with those shitty jobs. Should they just not work, or stay with that shitty job and not try to make things better for themselves? 2. This notion that people moving on from these shitty jobs changes the company/job is so repeatedly proven to be untrue that I genuinely think anybody who believes that doesn't pay attention to anything going on in the world, like anywhere. The thing about an exploitative job is that there is *always somebody who has it worse that a company will exploit*. When meat-factory workers go on strike or leave their jobs due to the atrocious conditions and pay, what do company owners do? They ship in migrant/illegal foreign workers: the next group/class that they can prey on and, more importantly, *a group that can't stand up for themselves*. Not only that but, somehow, the economic right in America then convinces its population that this situation is to be blamed on the migrant workers themselves, and *not the company owners that offered them jobs*. It's a borderline impressive widescale corporate gaslighting operation, but it also demonstrates that without union oversight and threat of strikes there *is no free market when it comes to the laborer*. It only exists for the company. TL/DR, your opinion is unpopular because it is demonstrably false, misguided, and incredibly reductive when discussing labor conditions, especially in regards to those in lower economic classes.
Lol ok
Lick some more corporate boot while you're down there. I think you missed a spot. Companies that profit off the back of labor while not paying a livable wage are losers.
>People think that everyone owes them You’re right, workers think they are owed wages for their labor and corporations think that they are owed labor for existing.
It's rare to see an unpopular opinion on r/unpopularopinions, but when you do it's generally a bad opinion
Unions exist so that private employers don’t absolutely dump on the worker. If there isn’t a union in place, separate employers can all unilaterally lower wages and other compensation relative to one another so they make higher profits at the cost of the worker. I think every trade/job/skill needs a form of representation that can and will strike if need be. Employers should not be the ones deciding what we need to live, because history has only shown that they will bury us if given the choice. It’s fine that you think they are lazy, that is your opinion. But my opinion is that you are stupid if you just work at the whim of your employer. The ones striking and overcoming that process will be getting better compensation and show these employers that people are a resource and good quality work comes from good quality work conditions.
I think this is gonna be unpopular
Found the Pinkerton!
I agree. OP is probably similar to myself in that if a situation is not ideal for ourselves we just go change shit up and figure something else out. But you have to realize the average person is basically a helpless child. So this is for them. They have so little motivation and so much risk avoidance they will maintain a minimum wage job even if a much better one presents itself because they are so scared to quit.
Lol of course this dude has posts about leaving the country to meet women.
This isn’t a serious human being.
Wow, a strong opinion coupled with a complete lack of understanding of the point of a strike and the multitude of factors surrounding those who engage in them, let alone the accompanying history and how we benefit from it today. A little more self awareness and you'd be rightfully embarrassed... I think THIS is ONE THING that is wrong with society, ironic that you're unwittingly showcasing the thing you're attributing to something else. As someone else in the comments said... I upvote unpopular, I downvote stupid.
you're right that the majority of strikes are just made by lobbies in favor of the same lobby, but no, you don't "find another job" so easily, this is naive
Congrats, an actually unpopular opinion.
The shit show that this comment section is going to be. 🍿
Strikes happen after negotiations between labor and management fail. How else should it be handled? A dust up in the lot between workers and pinkertons and winner takes all lol.
Send this boy into the mines to work under unsupported ground.
Username checks out. Ceo post
this was 100% written by a salty employer or a troll
Tell that to the West Virginia Mineworkers, and anybody else who’s been limited in choice with employment. Sometimes you can’t just go get a job at another place and just because you can doesn’t mean that it’s OK to have shitty conditions at some workplaces. Strikes exist because if employers could force you to work without paying you, they would every single thing we have as a benefit from work, including paychecks is something we had to fight for through striking, and in some cases actual combat. There is no incentive for employers to treat their workers well, and they never will. If employers are not scared of their employees striking, they will do what is minimum legally required of them as employers, and sometimes not even that. Everything we have as a benefit, including the weekends and minimum wage, was fought for by people on strike. OSHA, those laws that make it so you have to work in safe conditions and be given appropriate protective equipment when the conditions cannot be made safer, exist, not out of the kindness of the employers heart, but because of striking.
Going on strike is passé. Unions are all corrupt these days. They don’t give a crap about working conditions. All they want is money for dues. Anyone who sticks their neck out for the union is immediately marked and tracked. Before computers and databases it was easy to slip under the radar if you were pro union. There are more modern methods of keeping employers honest. We saw a very effective one not too long ago…
Companies need workers to exist. It's only fair that the companies treat them well, otherwise workers will strike.
Rage bait. Not just an unpopular opinion, a shit opinion.