the future is a drone strike against a picket line, or drugged out delta force team doing a funkytown to a union leader
steel yourselves everyone. get ready to educate some confused lost people
Gaza is a laboratory for our future
Jesus fucking Christ this is one of the scariest things I’ve ever seen online
People used to say "Jakarta is coming"
These days it's more like "Gaza is coming"
I have lost any faith in liberals not to justify the most heinous shit as long as a (D) is in the White House. They've proven willing to excuse a literal genocide. There is no bar too low.
Everyone who works for these people should take their opportunities to destroy them. We need an underground union like fight club to take out these billionaires.
Wellp, we tried, back to taking CEOs hostage and dangling them off a bridge until they give the workers what they want. 
(I know this will never happen, I just want to enjoy some cope 
)
Let me join
Tbh while this is kinda scary, I do think it will lead to people becoming more militant/radicalized as the other comrade replied.
There was someone on r/union who mentioned that his MAGA coworkers thought that the tariffs would increase their work, but instead they are facing layoffs and work stoppages they stopped wearing the or trump hats and are taking off their bumper stickers. Kinda gives me hope that more people will come over to the commie side. Or they just become more fascist I guess
my only hope is that this admin is so openly fascist there's no where else to go in that direction (excluding shaving their head and becoming some gutter punk skinhead) every branch of American fascism (christian nationalists, nat cons, and yarvinists) are full integrated into maga. so if they abandon maga, the most they can do is go lone wolf against their own, go left, or totally disengage (disengagement is going to be getting closed off to most soon)
basically, the fascism is already here and proving itself shit. worst case scenario is a new resurgent, Strasserist psuedo-socialism from the Tucker wing but i think that's even weaker then we are right now. and it's too embedded into mega as well, basically everyone has gone in HARD on this thinking it's the one and only chance and blown their load
I would hope this is true but there are still a lot of true believers in Trump who I've met even recently, unfortunately. Purely anecdotal, though.
I think they will still go for more extreme fascism in the future.
oh i don't doubt the whole movement can shift further. i mean it is right now, just slower then it was earlier.
it really comes down to how fast they destroy living conditions locally. for every "trump is my whole identity" fandom adherent you have a normie "i'm a conservative until something effects me".
it's a big country with a huge armed population. if the true believers get reduced to some tiny percentage and try to genocide 75% of the population (all non-"heritage americans") like they want to: it's unprecedented. they don't have the numbers
only option would be a systemic nuclear carpet bombing of the whole nation (excluding their enclaves) or the movement to abandon everything and fall back into fortified micro-Israels and Gaza everyone else. either way the U.S. falls.
Yeah, definitely loving the California-Texas battle at the moment. Anything that furthers balkanization.
I just don't know yet if MAGA Trumpers will really reduce to such a small minority. I'm still very much in doubt that it'll disappear but I agree their movement is slowing, I just think they'll start accelerating further to the Right again when the conditions allow it. You're right though that it eventually and inevitably lead to collapse of the Empire. I just hope not to die before it happens because of some dumbass fascist shit. Haha
i just hope it happens before i get too old and broken to be able to react. if it really takes a while i'll be so old i won't be a threat but it looks more like "old enough so that you can be easily hunted by fascist zoomers that see you as a big scary threat"
You're right. We should hunt the zoomers now just to be safe.
Honestly, would be happy to see it happen at any age. As long as I'm alive and not senile, I could die in peace.
i just want an exit strategy so i don't get tortured to death or imprisoned. sorry if this is too grim. i've been on the inside of shit and will not go back alive
Nah, not at all. I'm really sorry you went through that.
I've never been but I am of the exact same opinion. Hope we both make it to see the new world without the Empire, Comrade!
The workers have done it before and they'll do it again. The only problem is life has to be míserable for them to start doing that again, so suffering will be guaranteed to go up first
Union guys named Mario have the opportunity to do something really funny.
Ripping the copper out of the walls (fuck around)
Wondering why the electricity doesn't work (find out)
doesn't work
Literally lol. Perhaps this can be a positive for workers; less red tape, more opportunity for militant action
doesn't dismantling labor union regulations make it so we can do legal wildcat strikes again? or is that not the specific law in question here.
First, wildcat strikes, and strikes in general, were never legal per-say. They became legal when the US finally concluded that they could not stop unions from forming and strikes from disrupting production.
Second, the NLRB's existence was specifically for the purposes of reducing interruptions in industrial production. The NLRB were never an efficient means of getting what you wanted/needed at work, they were mostly just a low-risk means of applying fines to an abusive employer.
The labor wars are coming back in style, most likely. It'll only be a matter of time before armed strikes and similar matters start happening again.
The recent Air Canada strike is a good example of what happens when the government gets too comfortable shutting down labour actions arbitrarily. If you make labour actions illegal, then workers will do illegal labour actions.
It would come down to exactly which portions of the NLRA (etc) are struck down. And I think any legislative revisiting of the NLRA will be sure to make any substantive labor actions illegal.
No, they just want to sack and replace them without cause
“The employers challenge the structure of the board itself—specifically, whether its members and administrative law judges are too insulated from presidential removal.” They are, and that makes the NLRB unconstitutional, the appellate court ruling says.
Reposting my comment from another thread
I don't mean to minimize this because it's obviously not good but its impact on the labor movement or existing practices in labor law is pretty insignificant and very much in line with the historical trajectory we've been on since Taft-Hartley. Trump already demonstrated he could remove board members and the GC with impunity and ALJs play a relatively minor role in the whole process.
The bigger issue is that the unions have let this shit slide for he last seventy years without offering even the most meager resistance to it. It's almost as if they want to be stamped out of existence.
The bigger issue is that unions have let this shit slide for he last seventy years without offering even the most meager resistance to it.
To be fair, unions were targeted by COINTELPRO and its offshoots. You had literal feds infiltrating unions to do ghoul shit. And the unions not targeted by the FBI were targeted by the mafia and Pinkertons.
Anyone who had the backbone to show solidarity was either killed or imprisoned. Employers used both legal and illegal methods of destroying unions with impunity.
The bigger issue is that the unions have let this shit slide for he last seventy years without offering even the most meager resistance to it. It's almost as if they want to be stamped out of existence.
Hard agree. I was one of the main organizers for my union struggle and the local we chose was worse than useless and kinda made me antiunion. At least in the way where I want wildcats and general strikes and actual direct action from the workers
The most fundamental challenge in unionization in the USA is choosing a union to affiliate with vs. trying to be independent. Changing later is very challenging, amounting to a decert and reunionization, so choosing "correctly" the first time is important.
While most unions you can affiliate with are lackluster to say the least, the main challenge to being independent is you will lack strike funds, logistical support, and legal support that some affiliate-able unions would provide. Management tends to realize this and subsequently bullies the new union.
This really is the main actual question in US trade unionism: how to bridge that challenge. To improve existing unions to suck less? To make independent unions more viable? To make something in-between? All of these are actually very difficult and at the end of the whole ordeal you can still end up with a union with petty bourgeois interests that won't work with your socialist org on a labor campaign.
With few exceptions you don't even really get to choose who you affiliate with though. You either end up with the Teamsters or an AFL-CIO affiliate that was granted your employer as "turf" twenty plus years ago. If neither of them consider you a worthwhile investment then good fucking luck getting any help.
And then if you do affiliate they'll tell you first contracts are always shitty and ram one through so they can get a security agreement in and start collecting dues.
That's another good point I forgot to mention: often no unions will even take you. A shop will be ready to go, an easy win, but none of the relevant unions do anything because the shop is "too small". The next least bad version is what you refered to: only one union will take you and they kind of suck. Though in my experience Teamsters can be pretty militant despite the union's overall right wing tendencies.
Oh yeah same. We got ghosted twice by the UFCW local we worked with before we gave up on them where I work. It took quite a while for me to work through that emotionally and made me realize a lot of the union orthodoxy is bullshit and so are those that preach it.
UFCW seems to be one of the worst unfortunately. My first job was a brief stint at a grocery store represented by them. This is when self checkouts were first introduced. Over half of the cashiers were laid off, and a couple had to relocate to stores that would've doubled their commute. Before that a cashier told me that when he started his job, there were only like 8 steps to journeyman pay, but during later negotiations it got doubled to 16 or something crazy like that.
I feel for you when it comes to the emotionality of it all. Myself and some of my comrades put our EVERYTHING into that struggle for close to 3 years, just for the department to dissolve just a couple months after the contract was ratified. I'm still kinda fucked up from how terrible and demoralizing it all was and I havent been at that job for nearly a year
I've seen UFCW hang a unit of thousands out to dry and get decertified because they decided it just "wasn't strategic".
The union rep I had lost the fucking COCA-COLA contract here; it probably would've been the biggest bargaining unit with the most dues paid for the whole local. Those workers decertified and were super bitter towards unions after. Why would they let that happen if they would get so much notoriety/money out of a unit?
UFCW structures itself with the bureaucratic old guard at the top who care more about loyalty than competence (they do still make a show of it internally but really and truly do not give a fuck) and does extraordinarily cynical math about cost:benefit ratios. A big new unit can actually threaten the power structure as new members expect representation, but it can be hard to tease out incompetence from cynical power hoarding from afar.
UFCW is up there for worst big union around.
Of course he did, the SCOTUS is there so people like him and entities like his always wins.
Sorry I don't have the source or much background to back this up, but I saw a video of some union organizers talking about how the NLRB is much more important for the types of workers who don't have inherent economic power such as baristas, grocery store workers, and so on. They said that for people who want to organize more economically powerful workers (scarce skillsets or experience etc.), the NLRB could just as often get in the way of things.
Does anyone know what I'm referring to, or can anyone back that up?
Hmm I don't really know about that. I think regardless of union representation, within the NLRB or not, the boss is gonna do what the boss is gonna do. I think laborers with specialized skill sets will always have more power. Service workers who are represented by a union under the NLRB often still get laid off, replaced, retaliated against regardless of what the "rules" are, and in my experience are restrained by their local because if your local is yellow they will go to any lengths to keep you from striking or being militant and they might even hurt you at the bargaining table. Even with the NLRB you can only strike for two reasons, the vote takes months to process, work stoppages are not allowed, etc. So I think it can be equally harmful to any worker, but that all depends on the unions willingness to get rowdy.
I fear the NLRB being dismantled because most workers in the US are not at a stage where they are willing to put the work in to organize and be militant. They want all that work done for them, so I feel like unions would all but dissolve without the apparatus we have now. People will just shrug their shoulders when theirs goes away, so at least with the shitty system we have now there is some sort of shield and protections if your local cares about you, anyway
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --