1230
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 128 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The last place I worked at sent an email of "congratulations" to the staff for a new annual profit record, and instituted a pay freeze later in the same month because they were trying and eventually did sell to a publically traded company and low payroll looks better in the sale, that proceeded to fire everyone because they were only interested in killing local competition in the market.

Workers working too hard for the owner literally cost us our jobs.

The owners have no bravery and take no risks that labor doesn't bear the biggest brunt of. This entire economy is a scam that stands on pillars of lies/propaganda.

Side note, who the fuck celebrates their employer making record profits if they aren't in a super rare in the US cooperative or generous stock dispersment program? The whole point of employment is to provide the least labor for the most reward while they try to get the most labor for the least reward, record profits means I'm working too hard for them.

AdaptHealth was the national conglomerate that swalllowed us and a hundred other local homecare/dme providers for overt competition slaughter btw. Their whole goal was/is to enshittify home healthcare/dme for private profit, and the original ceo had to step down because he committed tax evasion in a European country that actually gives a shit. If they're in charge of your grandmother's homecare/dme, say your goodbyes to grandma and make sure they didn't triple bill.

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 69 points 1 month ago

Oh puh-lease!

Employees don't risk anything except their career, livelihoods, and homes.

Investors take enormous risks, like a small amount of their vast wealth, and maybe even risk losing a controlling interest in the board. If they really fuck up, they might even risk not being allowed to be a CEO again for a few years.

But go on, try to convince me again that employees deserve a bigger share...

[-] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

You know, it always amazes me how people equate layoffs with losing livelihoods here. Is that how it is in America? Seems so alien, when where I live, being fired (without cause) would be somewhere between a non-event and a pleasant break using the severance pay.

[-] CthuluVoIP@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

Often, yes. Outside of more senior level white collar careers, severance is often not guaranteed upon separation here. In many states, “Right to Work” labor laws enable an employer to terminate an employee for nearly any reason. To make matters worse, our health insurance is provided as a benefit by our employers, so losing your job not only means you lose your source of income, but also your means of keeping yourself healthy and getting care should you need it.

And in many cases, even if you do receive severance, the company determines what your separation package includes, and the calculations used to determine the value is kept behind closed doors and obscured from the employee. The packages are presented as non-negotiable, even though they aren’t, and employees being let go are often pressured to sign the agreement in a very short window or risk having the offer of severance rescinded. Often what is offered is a pittance, but generally Americans don’t push back against it. It’s a “better than nothing, I guess” situation.

So yeah - being laid off is a tremendously stressful and life altering experience here for the vast majority of the working and middle class.

[-] Promethiel@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago

Smallest of corrections because the bastards are multiple flavors of bastards: '

'At will employment' is the "fire you for any or no reason so long as we don't transparently enough do it for/to the small list of protected reasons or qualifying personal attributes for protected class status.

The sick joke is that you can terminate your employment 'At will' too, unlike those other work contract places isn't that liberating!

That one is in all of the US.

'Right to work' would be the anti-union version which applies to some states that have gone extra harder than the other ones to prevent the evil evil unions. Plenty of folks better suited than me to explain more around Lemmy.

The sick joke with that one is that you have "the right to work" even when that evil evil union is doing collective bargaining outside with funky signs!

Person who replied to who I replied to; the list of shit Americans ought to be focusing on legislating for is intentionally multi-faceted and obtuse; do you really think such simple insight beyond what you would consider obvious? Our great thinkers aren't dumb, they're oppressed.

[-] Bgugi@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

To double down on the "um actually..."

Right to work laws guarantee the benefits of a union while also removing the requirement to pay for that union. The goal is to have enough people try to get a free ride with the union that it collapses under it's own weight.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Wrench@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

Depends. I'm an experienced programmer. It has never taken me more than a month of casual searching to land the next gig, no relocation.

But if you're a factory worker in bum fuck nowhere, where the factory is the town, well, layoffs are going to be catastrophic for most, particularly since relocating would almost certainly be to a more expensive area.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] sunbrrnslapper@lemmy.world 32 points 1 month ago

How is it that no company has union busted by handing out shares of the business to their workers?

[-] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 16 points 1 month ago

Bob's Red Mill did something of the sort and is 100% employee-owned as of 2020. The stated intent was to avoid the investor-driven abuse of employees and customers for profit. It's not a workers' co-op, to be clear, but runs under an ESOP.

[-] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 12 points 1 month ago

Kroger did that as a way to defeat a hostile takeover

[-] sunbrrnslapper@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

Gotta check that out - thanks!!

[-] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 month ago
[-] sunbrrnslapper@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

Amazing... I gotta go see how it practically worked out. Thanks for the example!

[-] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 29 points 1 month ago

The shareholders could go poor while labor gets all the money and I still won't be happy. The shareholders have more power than the workers. Fixing wealth doesn't magically summon democracy and fix power imbalances.

Power imbalance is the sickness, wealth inequality is a symptom.

All companies need to be owned by their workers.

[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

this is also true for customers - imo customers also need a stake in businesses especially ones that have anything approaching a monopoly.

The obvious solution would be a law that any company of a certain size should have 25% of its board nominated and elected by non managerial workers and 25% appointed by public election or appointed by an elected official.

[-] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

Or just have the entire company run democratically. And before you say this can't work let me introduce you to a worker co-op with over $12 billion in revenue annually

[-] PotatoesFall@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 month ago

I think this depends on the company.

Yes if there is monopoly, for sure, I agree.

Also companies offering essential services.

Most importantly social media. Social media is run by users, and they should have a majority representation. The social media company is just doing an IT service, really.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 27 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Last month we had our AGM where they announced record profits, like our company has literally never done better. Just in the difference in profits from last year they could give every employee in the company a $15k bonus.

Then a week later we had a department meeting where they announced 6 people being made redundant as part of a larger wave of lay-off to "keep the company competitive in a challenging market"

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] GrayBackgroundMusic@lemm.ee 27 points 1 month ago

Still mad that a coworker got fired because a different, unrelated department lost a sale. Sales keeps their bonuses but socialized their loss. Fuck them.

[-] Ultraviolet@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

It should be illegal to do layoffs or pay freezes to save money unless the CEO's compensation is at or below a threshold set proportionally to the lowest paid employee.

[-] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 month ago

Sounds good, until you realize this just encourages them to do a bunch of “for cause” firings before the mass layoff.

[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 14 points 1 month ago

We have awarded ourselves a round of bonuses to reflect how well we've navigated these layoffs.

[-] Reddfugee42@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

The only risk management takes is becoming labor

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2024
1230 points (99.0% liked)

Political Memes

4362 readers
2285 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS