I'm glad they quickly struck a deal! I'm disappointed they won't be increasing the usage of robotic assistance to make their jobs safer, but it's important for the US that ports stay operational.
I'm glad they quickly struck a deal! I'm disappointed they won't be increasing the usage of robotic assistance to make their jobs safer, but it's important for the US that ports stay operational.
They very much did not strike a deal. They decided to suspend negotiations to January, so we could easily be back in this situation right before the State of the Union. And there's a nonzero...
They very much did not strike a deal. They decided to suspend negotiations to January, so we could easily be back in this situation right before the State of the Union. And there's a nonzero chance, since I'm sure they had many more months before the contract expired to decide on a deal.
The why's and hows are a huge enigma right now, so I can't even begin to guess what happened so suddenly. The are using the Hurricane relief as a partial justification, but I'm a bit suspicious on that front.
It makes sense to me: the general public is less likely to be supportive of a strike if it harms hurricane relief or causes more disruption to industries already inspected by the hurricane. We're...
It makes sense to me: the general public is less likely to be supportive of a strike if it harms hurricane relief or causes more disruption to industries already inspected by the hurricane. We're already seeing news about hospitals conserving IV fluid bags that are mainly produced in North Carolina or concerns about the disruption to the specific sand for semiconductors which primarily (~70%) comes from that area.
Shutting down imports on top of peoples' homes and livelihoods being destroyed and potential impending resource contention from industries being disrupted isn't the best look, and is going to draw ire from the public at large, most of who only care about politics insofar as how they think they directly affect them.
Imagine the talk if nurses in the affected areas all went on strike the day after the hurricane. This isn't that different, other than that the results are more delayed and less direct. I can definitely see that being a concern of the union.
That should be more reason to pay your staff properly. They are providing crucial services but cannot keep a roof over their heads. How should that make a relief victim feel of their saviors? But...
That should be more reason to pay your staff properly. They are providing crucial services but cannot keep a roof over their heads. How should that make a relief victim feel of their saviors?
But I get it. Corporate propaganda is strong and I already saw enough people blaming the union for not having toilet paper (a locally produced good...). People are stupid and will keep clawing at each other while the man in the ivory tower reaps the rewards.
Yes, and I wonder why. Analysts were suspecting that the election pressure would force a decision (and Unions are more or less 50/50 on political lines, so the result wouldn't impact them either...
Yes, and I wonder why. Analysts were suspecting that the election pressure would force a decision (and Unions are more or less 50/50 on political lines, so the result wouldn't impact them either way as a whole). It feels like the Union just threw out its ace to a fast resolution.
Either way, I expect things to get worse before it gets better. The economy and its "recovery" has been nothing but curveballs and gaslighting this year. I don't expect 2025 to magically fix it all (no matter who sits in office)
The US economy is generally really strong outside of certain white-collar sectors. And those certain sectors make up a disproportionate share of the media and those online, soooooo. (Although...
The US economy is generally really strong outside of certain white-collar sectors. And those certain sectors make up a disproportionate share of the media and those online, soooooo. (Although housing is still a problem, but that's a whole other thing.)
I feel like talking about the economy while dismissing housing is like talking about movies but dismissing the director. "well they made a few stinkers, but that's another problem". But it's late...
I feel like talking about the economy while dismissing housing is like talking about movies but dismissing the director. "well they made a few stinkers, but that's another problem".
But it's late for me and I don't have the energy rant about the entire past 2-3 years of the business/worker dynamic and the shift of job models. So I wish you a good day/night.
From what I've seen the unions are historically pretty left leaning and endorse the democratic candidates, just happens that this year there's a large enough portion of union members that want to...
(and Unions are more or less 50/50 on political lines, so the result wouldn't impact them either way as a whole).
From what I've seen the unions are historically pretty left leaning and endorse the democratic candidates, just happens that this year there's a large enough portion of union members that want to fellate El Cheeto that the leaders can't officially endorse either candidate without sowing division amongst the ranks.
How dumb do you have to be to be part of a union and want that orange grease stain to be president. After all he's said shitting on unions and wanting to end things like overtime pay.
How dumb do you have to be to be part of a union and want that orange grease stain to be president. After all he's said shitting on unions and wanting to end things like overtime pay.
There are a lot of blue collar unions that actively hate their unions. As someone from the Motor City, there's become an adopted view that unions just protect the guys that slack off and do drugs,...
There are a lot of blue collar unions that actively hate their unions.
As someone from the Motor City, there's become an adopted view that unions just protect the guys that slack off and do drugs, without any acknowledgement that their wages and other benefits are negotiated by the union itself.
They feel they'd be able to get more if they weren't "carrying" those other people or didn't have the required provided benefits or other protections. And some of them could make more without...
They feel they'd be able to get more if they weren't "carrying" those other people or didn't have the required provided benefits or other protections. And some of them could make more without benefits and job protection hopping from job to job. I've known welders who lived that life. Until you get hurt.
That's crazy, NPR and local GBH made it sound like it was over this morning... no mention of a postponement. Guess there were bigger titillating headlines (that I am not remembering right now...
That's crazy, NPR and local GBH made it sound like it was over this morning... no mention of a postponement. Guess there were bigger titillating headlines (that I am not remembering right now whatsoever).
Well, the strike is over - there isn't a deal, and that sort of mirrors the language used around the writers' and actors' strikes. You'd see them end the strike then vote on the contract. If the...
Well, the strike is over - there isn't a deal, and that sort of mirrors the language used around the writers' and actors' strikes. You'd see them end the strike then vote on the contract. If the contract hadn't passed with membership they could have re-struck.
Yeah, but Boston is a huge union city. I wouldn't expect the national level of NPR to drill down, but local would typically mention the why. I was in the gym at the time, and as I'm searching I...
Yeah, but Boston is a huge union city. I wouldn't expect the national level of NPR to drill down, but local would typically mention the why. I was in the gym at the time, and as I'm searching I see the morning edition doesn't have a historical listen option. I know they were streaming to Twitch for a bit, but I can't even find that.
I just find it somewhat odd, as even strikes that don't affect us locally are usually covered and explained with more details.
You could probably find it on NPR One. You may have just caught the national coverage and not heard the local coverage that might have come later. I do recall hearing it on the radio this morning,...
You could probably find it on NPR One.
You may have just caught the national coverage and not heard the local coverage that might have come later. I do recall hearing it on the radio this morning, but I already knew that the deal wasn't finalized so I'm not sure if my memory of what I heard is correct. My local affiliate didn't cover it for sure but I'm nowhere near the coast
As far as union goals go, I think returning to work was a mistake. By returning to work, they're letting the last of the Christmas stuff get through, and now nobody in Corporate-land is going to...
As far as union goals go, I think returning to work was a mistake.
By returning to work, they're letting the last of the Christmas stuff get through, and now nobody in Corporate-land is going to listen.
They had Santa by the balls. They should have squeezed.
I think they would have looked terrible if they had interfered with repair and rebuilding in North Carolina and Georgia right now. There are always costs and benefits but I don't think they made a...
I think they would have looked terrible if they had interfered with repair and rebuilding in North Carolina and Georgia right now.
There are always costs and benefits but I don't think they made a bad choice. And they can try again next October if they want Christmas leverage.
Why do we blame the unions for the timing of their strike? Like, yeah, they are the ones that decide when / if, but it's not like they just arbitrarily decide to do it on a whim. Like I'm not...
Why do we blame the unions for the timing of their strike? Like, yeah, they are the ones that decide when / if, but it's not like they just arbitrarily decide to do it on a whim.
Like I'm not saying you specifically, but there's definitely a wide spread view that ill timed or inconvenient strikes are blamed solely on the union.
I agree with you that it's not the union's fault, and that blame should typically be on the employer for not bargaining in good faith and avoiding a strike in the first place. That being said,...
I agree with you that it's not the union's fault, and that blame should typically be on the employer for not bargaining in good faith and avoiding a strike in the first place. That being said, public perception matters a lot of the success of a strike (especially one like this, where the public are likely to feel the potential effects), so the perception of the union disrupting things matters. And I think most unions recognize this and try to maintain public support.
It's case by case for me and I tend to support unions. However at a moment when many businesses and individuals are donating large amounts of money and significant volunteer time, in addition to...
It's case by case for me and I tend to support unions. However at a moment when many businesses and individuals are donating large amounts of money and significant volunteer time, in addition to millions of dollars and thousands of personnel in government efforts to rescue people and prevent further loss of life, it looks bad when anyone prioritizes mercenary concerns regardless of how otherwise justified. This disaster is Katrina scale if not bigger. The government and private response looks like the Berlin airlift just to get food and water to people.
Personally I think this is pretty different. Strikes have been repeatedly proven to provide direct benefits for the ones doing it. I’ve still seen very little if any evidence that traffic protests...
Personally I think this is pretty different.
Strikes have been repeatedly proven to provide direct benefits for the ones doing it. I’ve still seen very little if any evidence that traffic protests do anything for their supposed cause
The two things aren't the same, but the reason people get upset about them is usually because it negatively impacts them personally. I could also say it's the same reason people excuse their own...
The two things aren't the same, but the reason people get upset about them is usually because it negatively impacts them personally.
I could also say it's the same reason people excuse their own bad driving but get pissed at other people's bad driving. People can be very self-centered.
Because people will die and at that point people tend to blame everyone involved, likely as they should? Yes it’s bs they were put in this position but you do have to carry some of the blame if...
Because people will die and at that point people tend to blame everyone involved, likely as they should?
Yes it’s bs they were put in this position but you do have to carry some of the blame if you decide to carry on the strike after a disaster.
Maybe this happened now because there was increasing scrutiny of the union head and more awareness of the timing as a political stunt. "This strike is causing heads to explode," wrote Philadelphia...
Maybe this happened now because there was increasing scrutiny of the union head and more awareness of the timing as a political stunt.
"This strike is causing heads to explode," wrote Philadelphia columnist Will Bunch, linking to the New York Post article outlining the outsized wealth of ILA boss Harold Daggett, who has threatened to "cripple" the U.S. economy if his demands are not met and has twice beaten allegations from the Justice Department that he has ties to the Mafia. "Here's the zealously pro-Trump (but anti-union) NY Post righteously going after the pro-Trump union boss who's shutting down the economy to help Trump."
Authoritarianism expert Ruth Ben-Ghiat had similar concerns to Bunch: "Economic sabotage to create conditions for public to think democracy is failing and accept unlawful removal of a progressive government has been part of the right-wing playbook for many decades. It prepared the public to accept a coup in Chile in 1973."
I'm glad they quickly struck a deal! I'm disappointed they won't be increasing the usage of robotic assistance to make their jobs safer, but it's important for the US that ports stay operational.
They very much did not strike a deal. They decided to suspend negotiations to January, so we could easily be back in this situation right before the State of the Union. And there's a nonzero chance, since I'm sure they had many more months before the contract expired to decide on a deal.
The why's and hows are a huge enigma right now, so I can't even begin to guess what happened so suddenly. The are using the Hurricane relief as a partial justification, but I'm a bit suspicious on that front.
It makes sense to me: the general public is less likely to be supportive of a strike if it harms hurricane relief or causes more disruption to industries already inspected by the hurricane. We're already seeing news about hospitals conserving IV fluid bags that are mainly produced in North Carolina or concerns about the disruption to the specific sand for semiconductors which primarily (~70%) comes from that area.
Shutting down imports on top of peoples' homes and livelihoods being destroyed and potential impending resource contention from industries being disrupted isn't the best look, and is going to draw ire from the public at large, most of who only care about politics insofar as how they think they directly affect them.
Imagine the talk if nurses in the affected areas all went on strike the day after the hurricane. This isn't that different, other than that the results are more delayed and less direct. I can definitely see that being a concern of the union.
That should be more reason to pay your staff properly. They are providing crucial services but cannot keep a roof over their heads. How should that make a relief victim feel of their saviors?
But I get it. Corporate propaganda is strong and I already saw enough people blaming the union for not having toilet paper (a locally produced good...). People are stupid and will keep clawing at each other while the man in the ivory tower reaps the rewards.
They struck a deal on wage increases. Protection from automation is what is still being hammered out.
Unless there was more updates, everything reported is tentative. Usually a good sign, but we're in unusual times.
Well at least they struck a temporary deal to not strike right before the election. Things could be worse.
Yes, and I wonder why. Analysts were suspecting that the election pressure would force a decision (and Unions are more or less 50/50 on political lines, so the result wouldn't impact them either way as a whole). It feels like the Union just threw out its ace to a fast resolution.
Either way, I expect things to get worse before it gets better. The economy and its "recovery" has been nothing but curveballs and gaslighting this year. I don't expect 2025 to magically fix it all (no matter who sits in office)
The US economy is generally really strong outside of certain white-collar sectors. And those certain sectors make up a disproportionate share of the media and those online, soooooo. (Although housing is still a problem, but that's a whole other thing.)
I feel like talking about the economy while dismissing housing is like talking about movies but dismissing the director. "well they made a few stinkers, but that's another problem".
But it's late for me and I don't have the energy rant about the entire past 2-3 years of the business/worker dynamic and the shift of job models. So I wish you a good day/night.
From what I've seen the unions are historically pretty left leaning and endorse the democratic candidates, just happens that this year there's a large enough portion of union members that want to fellate El Cheeto that the leaders can't officially endorse either candidate without sowing division amongst the ranks.
How dumb do you have to be to be part of a union and want that orange grease stain to be president. After all he's said shitting on unions and wanting to end things like overtime pay.
There are a lot of blue collar unions that actively hate their unions.
As someone from the Motor City, there's become an adopted view that unions just protect the guys that slack off and do drugs, without any acknowledgement that their wages and other benefits are negotiated by the union itself.
They feel they'd be able to get more if they weren't "carrying" those other people or didn't have the required provided benefits or other protections. And some of them could make more without benefits and job protection hopping from job to job. I've known welders who lived that life. Until you get hurt.
Extremely dumb. I.e., your average public citizen.
That's crazy, NPR and local GBH made it sound like it was over this morning... no mention of a postponement. Guess there were bigger titillating headlines (that I am not remembering right now whatsoever).
Well, the strike is over - there isn't a deal, and that sort of mirrors the language used around the writers' and actors' strikes. You'd see them end the strike then vote on the contract. If the contract hadn't passed with membership they could have re-struck.
So it's technically correct.
Yeah, but Boston is a huge union city. I wouldn't expect the national level of NPR to drill down, but local would typically mention the why. I was in the gym at the time, and as I'm searching I see the morning edition doesn't have a historical listen option. I know they were streaming to Twitch for a bit, but I can't even find that.
I just find it somewhat odd, as even strikes that don't affect us locally are usually covered and explained with more details.
You could probably find it on NPR One.
You may have just caught the national coverage and not heard the local coverage that might have come later. I do recall hearing it on the radio this morning, but I already knew that the deal wasn't finalized so I'm not sure if my memory of what I heard is correct. My local affiliate didn't cover it for sure but I'm nowhere near the coast
Yeah, but the bit I was trying to find was on GBH, the local option.
Oh I misunderstood.
Found this at WBUR
https://www.wbur.org/npr/nx-s1-5139450/dockworkers-port-strike-deal
As far as union goals go, I think returning to work was a mistake.
By returning to work, they're letting the last of the Christmas stuff get through, and now nobody in Corporate-land is going to listen.
They had Santa by the balls. They should have squeezed.
I think they would have looked terrible if they had interfered with repair and rebuilding in North Carolina and Georgia right now.
There are always costs and benefits but I don't think they made a bad choice. And they can try again next October if they want Christmas leverage.
Why do we blame the unions for the timing of their strike? Like, yeah, they are the ones that decide when / if, but it's not like they just arbitrarily decide to do it on a whim.
Like I'm not saying you specifically, but there's definitely a wide spread view that ill timed or inconvenient strikes are blamed solely on the union.
I agree with you that it's not the union's fault, and that blame should typically be on the employer for not bargaining in good faith and avoiding a strike in the first place. That being said, public perception matters a lot of the success of a strike (especially one like this, where the public are likely to feel the potential effects), so the perception of the union disrupting things matters. And I think most unions recognize this and try to maintain public support.
It's case by case for me and I tend to support unions. However at a moment when many businesses and individuals are donating large amounts of money and significant volunteer time, in addition to millions of dollars and thousands of personnel in government efforts to rescue people and prevent further loss of life, it looks bad when anyone prioritizes mercenary concerns regardless of how otherwise justified. This disaster is Katrina scale if not bigger. The government and private response looks like the Berlin airlift just to get food and water to people.
The same reason protestors are blamed for traffic issues. People can get very self-centered and concerned about the impact on them.
Personally I think this is pretty different.
Strikes have been repeatedly proven to provide direct benefits for the ones doing it. I’ve still seen very little if any evidence that traffic protests do anything for their supposed cause
The two things aren't the same, but the reason people get upset about them is usually because it negatively impacts them personally.
I could also say it's the same reason people excuse their own bad driving but get pissed at other people's bad driving. People can be very self-centered.
Because people will die and at that point people tend to blame everyone involved, likely as they should?
Yes it’s bs they were put in this position but you do have to carry some of the blame if you decide to carry on the strike after a disaster.
Or January, if negotiations break down again. I don't think they want to wait another full year in these economic times.
…and then gotten replaced by grateful Haitian refugees in the transition to robots.
The "transition to robots" is happening regardless. Why not get as much as you got stolen from you back on the way out?
Maybe this happened now because there was increasing scrutiny of the union head and more awareness of the timing as a political stunt.
"This strike is causing heads to explode," wrote Philadelphia columnist Will Bunch, linking to the New York Post article outlining the outsized wealth of ILA boss Harold Daggett, who has threatened to "cripple" the U.S. economy if his demands are not met and has twice beaten allegations from the Justice Department that he has ties to the Mafia. "Here's the zealously pro-Trump (but anti-union) NY Post righteously going after the pro-Trump union boss who's shutting down the economy to help Trump."
Authoritarianism expert Ruth Ben-Ghiat had similar concerns to Bunch: "Economic sabotage to create conditions for public to think democracy is failing and accept unlawful removal of a progressive government has been part of the right-wing playbook for many decades. It prepared the public to accept a coup in Chile in 1973."