37 comments

[ 8.9 ms ] story [ 89.2 ms ] thread
(comment deleted)
[flagged]
Thanks to labor unions (and previous strikes), not having to work in the evening and on weekends is now something we take for granted. Viva la revolución indeed!
Ironically, you can thank the very men and women you mock for the fact that you don't work on weekends and evenings.
I remember reading that Henry Ford introduced the 5 day work week at Ford as a way of growing the middle class such that more people could afford model Ts.

Is that just spin? I imagine there was some pressure from labour movements as well, but I suppose we don't know the true motivations one way or the other.

He certainly represented it and the associated pay rise as an effort to grow his customer base.

(comment deleted)
Working in ford's plants was hell. This was an observation that he either had to improve treatment or risk loosing workers.
Lotta retconning with Henry Ford.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/one-hundred-and-th...

> In 1913 alone, Ford had to hire more than 52,000 workers for a workforce that at any one time numbered 14,000, writes Swan. In an attempt to to stem the tide of turnover, he upped the company’s wage rate to an unheard-of $5 per eight-hour workday. The norm for that time was about $2.25 for a nine-hour workday

Ha, sounds like it was indeed spin.

Interesting what sticks, because I've read it twice recently, once even in a fairly left-leaning setting.

It's spin from both sides though.

Ford pays more and says "look what I have given you in my great benevolence." Unions say "look what we have negotiated for you through our great struggle." But really what happened is Ford needed to hire a lot of people so the price of labor went up through supply and demand.

> what happened is Ford needed to hire a lot of people so the price of labor went up through supply and demand

This is the best way to drive up salaries, as it's closely tied to demand. Just as Silicon Valley salaries and benefits - some of the best in the world, from non-institutionalised sources, anyway - were produced via competition, and not via strikes.

It’s spin. People hated assembly line work so he had to pay more money.
This makes no sense on the face of it. A company that pays its employees more so that they can afford its products?
For a pay rise sure. A cut to a 5 day work week though could just mean more people employed overall at minimal extra expense.

If you have a monopoly that is demand constrained that might make sense?

If people buy your cars with credit it might make even more sense?

> Ironically, you can thank the very men and women you mock

Unless time travel is involved, I'm not sure that's true.

actually we work more because 5(8+8) > 6(12 + 0)
You can thank the unions of the past for the forty hour work week, the very concept of a weekend, paid sick leave, and the lack of child labour. They fought for these rights, often risking their lives* in doing so. Mocking them is extremely distasteful.

* Yes, "lives", not just livelihoods. See for example the haymarket massacre.

The unions which won the forty hour work week and the weekend did not employ "polite" striking tactics. They aimed to levy as much damage as possible.

Yellow unions, on the other hand...

If this is indeed a yellow union, I stand corrected, of course. What makes you say it is?
> Mocking them is extremely distasteful.

Unless time travel is involved, the people mentioned in the article did not achieve those things.

Organized labor did, which this is, and you can't build anything without labor (much to the chagrin of investors and anyone else making their living off of imaginary numbers in a database).
This is a category error. The people in the article did not do this.
That's not what category error means.
Subcategory: the people mentioned in the article striking over a weekend with a public holiday in it.

Supercategory: all organised labour ever.

Category error: thinking a joke about people striking over a public holiday weekend is mocking all organised labour ever.

I thank the inventors and capitalists for making industry efficient enough to make those things possible. If anything unions are parasitic drag on that.
That's ahistorical at best. Compare worker's rights in capitalist countries which had strong unions and in ines that didn't and you'll see you're wrong.
Again: if it weren't for organised labour those "efficiency gains" would manifest as bigger profits for the owner class, not as better working conditions or more leisure or more money for the working class.

As, indeed, we've seen for the past 50 years in the first world: weak organised labour and skyrocketing inequalities between labour and capital.

This is a bit simple, though, as it discounts the existence of competition. The best job security is other employers, and the best prices come from the existence of other providers.
> The workers are members of the National Samsung Electronics Union (NSEU) and are employing a "coordinated use of vacation" according to deputy union chief Lee Hyun-guk.

> Using leave to protest working conditions is a very polite way to go about an industrial dispute. This one is made even more polite by the fact that Thursday was South Korea's Memorial Day holiday, so taking Friday off to enjoy a long weekend is not unusual.

> One local media report even alleged Samsung management encouraged employees to use annual leave on this day.

Everyone taking vacation on a Friday holiday with the encouragement of management is not what I expected from the headline.

Full title is "Samsung union stages its first ever strike – very politely" but OP cut the last bit for some reason.
The revolution was planned in advance... politely!
Politics? Needs to be more like Polititics!
(comment deleted)
For people lacking some background, South Korea used to have coordinated mass labour strikes across the country in the 90s[1][2] and early 00s[3], some of which turned violent. This type of 'polite' (possibly 'passive aggressive') protest is a signal that will be taken much more seriously by South Koreans across the board.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996%E2%80%931997_strikes_in_S...

[2] https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1990-05-02-mn-152-st...

[3] https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2003/11/kore-n19.html