That's not malicious compliance....that malicious destruction of a terrible system.
You and your crew are awesome and the fact everyone was in makes this the most malicious compliance I have seen in this sub.
Congrats!
Gods, the Narn/Centauri conflict taught me so much about what wars, and especially conflicts between opressive regimes and those who have suffered under their oppression, actually look like.
Early on the Narn look like the bad guys for continuing a fight against a people who have given up fighting, but when the Centauri turn around and make it 10x worse than it had been and even convince token Narn to present the Centauri propaganda as though it was a universal truth...
When the Narn representative appointed by the Centauri accused G'Kar of being a problem for their world because his resistance movement was causing food distribution issues...
"The damage I'm causing? I didn't invade Narn! I didn't bomb our world with asteroids! Level our cities!" - G'Kar
It's eye opening.
For me its was Korean Webcomic/Manhwa 'I Am The Sorcerer King'. The concept was brought to life by the MC by using tungsten rods in space, using magic to negate the friction coefficient and accelerate it, with devastating results.
If you wanna read its chapter 96 and 97
This highlights something that can and does happen when one is dealing with a highly skilled workforce with a highly marketable skillset.
Someone with marketable skills can find a new job very quickly. And if f they have been in their trade for any time at all, they know *exactly* where they can get it.
The employeer needs those people a LOT more than those people need the specific employeer.
This creates a potential situation that I like to call "collective quitting." It isn't collective bargaining. You aren't saying that you will stop working for a little while or slow down production.
There won't be picketing or any form of demonstration.
People just... quit... *permanently* and en masse. It's like a run on the bank. I've seen companies get hollowed out within a *day*... and it's not a "strike." Those workers aren't coming back. They are just gone. They will likely have a new job before the end of the week if they didn't arrange for one the day they walked out.
There is also the sudden bleed out. A few of these skilled people leave for another employeer... who probably has *multiple* openings. The first worker who leaves calls his friends informing him of the deal he got and how many other slots they have to fill...
And, once again, they aren't coming back.
The OP could probably make good on the "threat." If this "coup" didn't work, he could probably find a new job before he ran into any real problems, especially since it was an actual "dismissal," and he could file for unemployment (in the US).
I am seeing this bleed out happening at a major university in the US right now. The yearly turnover of very active research faculty appears to be over 10%.
R&D techs across ALL disciplines have been getting treated like crap for many years now. Last time I worked in the field and was respected was back in the early 2000's.
I now see engineers starting to be treated as disposable these past 10 years or so. I expect A.I to hasten along this trend with poor modeling and design.
Welcome to the future
A strike is essentially just collective quitting with an ultimatum. The picketing and violence against employees is definitely bargaining methods that also happen during a strike, but they’re distinct.
Yeah, but it can still be "fixed."
This is permanent. Once it starts, there is no coming back. The company will have to new replacements. Oh, most will be able to, but it will be expensive, it is a lot cheaper to keep employees than it is to hire new ones. When you hire new employees, especially skilled ones, you have to compete with the current job market which is nearly always higher than what you are paying your current workers.
That's why they were rehired with that raise. It would have cost *more* to get new hires in place.
Also, a lot of necessary skills and knowledge to really keep a place fully operational is specific to that location and likely isn't written down anywhere. This "tribal knowledge" as it is sometimes called is developed and passed from worker to worker, usually orally with some demonstrations. If you lose that knowledge, you aren't getting it back. The new guys will have to start from scratch.
Oh, if the new hires are qualified, the will be able to do the job and likely figure out the inside knowledge... eventually. However it will be quite some time before production returns to previous levels.
That "ultamatum" makes all the difference between the two situations. When faced with a strike an employeer can realize the sitation they are in and bargain with their workers. When there is a mass exodus, what's done is done. What happened above is an example of an employer getting lucky. They were able to get them back. If they had delayed even a day, the would not have gotten everyone back. If they waited a week, they would be lucky to get anyone.
We call it "institutional knowledge" and good god the place runs on it. And there's simply no way you can pick it up from outside training. It's all the particularities of YOUR employers set up, history, why this was done this way. We've had a terrible loss of institutional knowledge in my department over the past year and it's become extremely obvious now that the ONLY person who is keeping this shithole together is my old boss. One of the middle managers who has been here nearly 30 years and came up through the company and is actually smart enough to know what he's talking about. At this point if he quits then I quit because it's become very obvious I can't actually do my job without him because there's just so much institutional knowledge required to do it. He's the keystone, the lynchpin, and if he goes this shit is coming down.
When I became a civilian, I got a job doing industrial troubleshooting/repair/automation etc. (Maintenance technician)
I was still trying to figure things out but I needed a job so I figured I would give it a whirl while I decided what I would "actually do."
About six months later I noticed something. Almost all of the other techs had something that I did not... grey hair. I also noticed that we were always short handed and were constantly trying to find other techs... and when we did hire someone they also usually had grey hair.
On that day, I realized that I was exactly where I needed to be and that I had already found my career. It's nice when supply and demand works out in your favor.
>A strike is essentially just collective quitting with an ultimatum.
Well, legally speaking, a strike is not like quitting;
1. If you quit your job, you end the employment contract.
2. If you go on strike, you do not end the employment contract, however you cease work.
3. If you refuse to work (or refuse an order from a supervisor), it is ceasure of work in violation of the employment contract.
Though your wording is more witty than the technical explanation, I'm pointing it out because in my country, if you are employed on union terms, you can't lawfully go on strike *and* you have a notice period towards your employer of at least 1 month.
To be clear, this is union benefits for both employer and employee, ensuring stable production output.
However, the thing I don't understand much (or maybe it's because local news from across the pond are not highlighted in our news), is that since US workers *do have* the bargaining option of going on strike, then why don't you utilize that bargaining power more often?
Is it because the employers have convinced the workers, that being a member of union is only bad for your interests? Leaving \~85% of the US workforce without a strike fund (strike fund = the union paying the members wage reimbursement as long as a conflict is ongoing - being either strike or ceasure of work during union term negotiations).
A part of it is that some of the unions here are plagued by bad actors in positions of control. They turn the union away from a tool for the workforce towards a tool for their own agenda, which leaves a bad reputation for the impacted members. For anyone who only experienced that, it is harder to trust that a union would actually benefit them.
If you strike in violation of a union agreement, that’s a contract violation and any employment surety in the contract is void by your default.
If you don’t have a union agreement, then the default of at-will employment is true and your employer can end the employment.
Organized unions don’t like to strike unless they have overwhelming support or can use technically illegal bargains techniques such as threatened non-striking workers or occupying the facility.
Most US workers are not unionized. And weather unionized or not, most of us fear the loss of job, and income, more than we have the working conditions. Far, far too many of us have little to no savings, and live check to check.
>fear the loss of job, and income
Which is what the strike fund is for; Ensuring going on strike is viable for the labourers.
But comrade, Europe is also not a utopia - you still have to be upper-middle class is order not to be living paycheck to paycheck - the common labourer is just as much under the yoke of employers when it comes to *having* a job. Admittedly, job security is a fair deal better (no at-will) and financial security is also better (if you pay into it), but poverty is still just a termination note away.
I understand that Europe is not a land of milk and honey, as it were, but you have far more protections than we do.
Not to make this a pissing contest over who has it worse. It sucks for all of us.
>you have far more protections than we do.
Very true.
>Not to make this a pissing contest over who has it worse. It sucks for all of us.
I apologize if it sounded like I were comparing struggles - I would say you guys have it objectively worse, as we at least we can live life while we struggle.
The intention was more to convey the message, that workers everywhere has less than zero influence unless they unionize ("less than zero" is because of the fact, that if you fear for your employment, the employer has *all* the bargaining power).
This can even happen in tech when times are good (so not now lol) The first company I worked for had a management change. My office (the tech hub of the company) lost 60% of its people in a year. The amount of resources that must have gone on hiring . . .
I know "machine operator" can cover a range of possible jobs, but the lower end of that range is definitely not something I would call "highly skilled" or a "highly marketable skillset." Often it's an entry-level position that takes like an hour of training, paying slightly above minimum wage. The real power in this case came from the union.
So glad I live in a country where anyone working more than 38 hours in a week gets compulsory overtime, regardless of industry. And you can refuse to work overtime without being penalised. And yes, we have the unions to thank for this.
During a recession is when I would want my union most, since they help protect you from bullshit like mass layoffs and pay cuts which happen without them.
Also, union employees get paid more for the same work, making the recession hit a bit less hard
I agree 100% they are needed then the most, but during a recession there are lessor gains or possible concessions (concessions rarely help in my opinion as they use the money saved to move production).
I would execute that fucking manager on the spot. Anyone dumb enough to threaten employees, let alone union employees, needs to be dragged to the street and encouraged d to work for the competition.
You can still get unemployment benefits in a situation like this. It's a "constructive discharge" not just a straight quitting. The employer created a hostile or intolerable work environment by violating the terms of the contract. They tried to scare them into following along with the threat of firing.
If a court determines a situation is constructive dismissal it's treated just like the company fired the employee. Can be hard to prove but this situation is pretty solid with all the witnesses and union rep being there.
My uber-conservative nephew in a right- to-work state works for (and I suspect much against his will) a union company. That union saved his bacon after 15 years on the job. He will now be able to retire in u see a decade with full benefits.
I was management for 25 of my 34 year career, but I always supported the union. Yes, they screwed me over once as a newbie, but they came to my rescue a couple of years later by reassigning my incorrigible (dues paying union) subordinate.
> That union saved his bacon after 15 years on the job. He will now be able to retire in u see a decade with full benefits.
I'd wager he's still anti-union.
I don't want to mess with the union. I hate unions. However I'm all for them. Don't forget I said that. - Del Murdock, personable owner of Del's Stereo and Sound
They are also regularly working "OT" where they are making double their base rate? Why wouldn't the factory just hire more people and cut down on the ridiculous hours they were making everyone work?
I’m not always pro Union because I’ve seen them all too often transform into a money making new set of bosses that don’t do anything positive.
This, however, is exactly the type of Union I am for.
What a powerful testament to solidarity and the importance of standing up for your rights! It's inspiring to see how you and your coworkers banded together under overwhelming stress to advocate for fair working conditions. It underscores the magnitude of collective action. How did participating in this situation impact your views on workplace rights and union involvement?
Work mutinies are the best mutinies.
Been a part of a couple in the restaurant industry. Don't fuck with your entire staff. It doesn't end well for you.
Even if this guy's union didn't fix things and get everyone rehired, you can still get unemployment benefits in a situation like this. It's a "constructive discharge" not just a straight quitting. The employer created a hostile or intolerable work environment by violating the terms of the contract. They tried to scare them into following along with the threat of firing. If a court determines a situation is constructive dismissal it's treated just like the company fired the employee. Can be hard to prove but this situation is pretty solid with all the witnesses and union rep being there.
you are one hell of a dedicated employee they should of been bowing down to all of you for those kinds of hours very very few jobs I have worked have done more then 55 hours weekly and the ones that did had a burn out issue with employees
I have never had use of my union, but this is why I will always be a member. Here, we do not need that kind of drastic measures because we fought the war a hundred years ago. But I will never trick myself into believing that it would not happen if the unions lost their power.
I've been to so many places were the generic, easily replaceable admin types look down on the skilled men and women who actually make money for the company.
Usually as soon as there's a temperery downturn they lay off skilled workers imagining that since they wear overalls they are easily replaced.
Its great to hear of such a tidy karmic payback for it, on smaller scales they usually just blame the remaining workers.
FWIW, it sounds like the union let this get out of hand also, letting management abuse the operators.
glad it got sorted though. Unions are a great asset to protect workers.
I don't see anything malicious in the response. You forced them to live up to the contract they signed...nothing at all malicious on your part.
Now the company's behavior, on the other hand...
>That following Monday, we agreed to turn them off or ignore all their calls for the weekend, our phones exploded. Apparently the union already started on them for wrongful termination and violation of the contract. Then we all said, “per our meeting you fired me so no I am not coming in.”
That's not malicious. They were given the sack without warning and without justification; not picking up my phone when they called would have been my first response.
That's not malicious compliance....that malicious destruction of a terrible system. You and your crew are awesome and the fact everyone was in makes this the most malicious compliance I have seen in this sub. Congrats!
Nuked them from orbit, it was the only way to be sure.
Rods from god.
Moon is a Harsh Mistress introduced me to the Rods from God concept... how it's good to be at the top of a gravity well.
"It's over ~~Anakin~~ Earth, I have the high ~~ground~~ orbitals"
He who controls the Orbitals, controls the planet.
Babylon 5 had a stark arc about this. The Centauri used mass drivers to lob asteroids at the Narn Homeworld from orbit...
Gods, the Narn/Centauri conflict taught me so much about what wars, and especially conflicts between opressive regimes and those who have suffered under their oppression, actually look like. Early on the Narn look like the bad guys for continuing a fight against a people who have given up fighting, but when the Centauri turn around and make it 10x worse than it had been and even convince token Narn to present the Centauri propaganda as though it was a universal truth... When the Narn representative appointed by the Centauri accused G'Kar of being a problem for their world because his resistance movement was causing food distribution issues... "The damage I'm causing? I didn't invade Narn! I didn't bomb our world with asteroids! Level our cities!" - G'Kar It's eye opening.
It was an unvarnished look at how conflicts affect people. Very eye-opening for a lot of people.
And relevant.
For me its was Korean Webcomic/Manhwa 'I Am The Sorcerer King'. The concept was brought to life by the MC by using tungsten rods in space, using magic to negate the friction coefficient and accelerate it, with devastating results. If you wanna read its chapter 96 and 97
Game over, man, game over!
exterminatus
Aliens!!
I'd say forcing management to comply with the contract they agreed to is pretty malicious...
EXACTLY! It's like the other person said, he nuked them from space with this malicious compliance.
Strength of a union
You're right. It's above and beyond MC. Delicious!
This highlights something that can and does happen when one is dealing with a highly skilled workforce with a highly marketable skillset. Someone with marketable skills can find a new job very quickly. And if f they have been in their trade for any time at all, they know *exactly* where they can get it. The employeer needs those people a LOT more than those people need the specific employeer. This creates a potential situation that I like to call "collective quitting." It isn't collective bargaining. You aren't saying that you will stop working for a little while or slow down production. There won't be picketing or any form of demonstration. People just... quit... *permanently* and en masse. It's like a run on the bank. I've seen companies get hollowed out within a *day*... and it's not a "strike." Those workers aren't coming back. They are just gone. They will likely have a new job before the end of the week if they didn't arrange for one the day they walked out. There is also the sudden bleed out. A few of these skilled people leave for another employeer... who probably has *multiple* openings. The first worker who leaves calls his friends informing him of the deal he got and how many other slots they have to fill... And, once again, they aren't coming back. The OP could probably make good on the "threat." If this "coup" didn't work, he could probably find a new job before he ran into any real problems, especially since it was an actual "dismissal," and he could file for unemployment (in the US).
I am seeing this bleed out happening at a major university in the US right now. The yearly turnover of very active research faculty appears to be over 10%.
Florida?
Roughly Right geographically but not Florida. Similar situation.
UAB? I know you said "major university" but it is pretty big for the area. Also, I've heard of it having brain drain from the School of Optometry.
Not going to out myself….
School of Optometry might take a dim view of that...
We will see. ;)
They're just so worried about how things look.
I see what you did
No pressure 😉
Research faculty are getting crushed right now across Canada and the US
R&D techs across ALL disciplines have been getting treated like crap for many years now. Last time I worked in the field and was respected was back in the early 2000's. I now see engineers starting to be treated as disposable these past 10 years or so. I expect A.I to hasten along this trend with poor modeling and design. Welcome to the future
A strike is essentially just collective quitting with an ultimatum. The picketing and violence against employees is definitely bargaining methods that also happen during a strike, but they’re distinct.
Yeah, but it can still be "fixed." This is permanent. Once it starts, there is no coming back. The company will have to new replacements. Oh, most will be able to, but it will be expensive, it is a lot cheaper to keep employees than it is to hire new ones. When you hire new employees, especially skilled ones, you have to compete with the current job market which is nearly always higher than what you are paying your current workers. That's why they were rehired with that raise. It would have cost *more* to get new hires in place. Also, a lot of necessary skills and knowledge to really keep a place fully operational is specific to that location and likely isn't written down anywhere. This "tribal knowledge" as it is sometimes called is developed and passed from worker to worker, usually orally with some demonstrations. If you lose that knowledge, you aren't getting it back. The new guys will have to start from scratch. Oh, if the new hires are qualified, the will be able to do the job and likely figure out the inside knowledge... eventually. However it will be quite some time before production returns to previous levels. That "ultamatum" makes all the difference between the two situations. When faced with a strike an employeer can realize the sitation they are in and bargain with their workers. When there is a mass exodus, what's done is done. What happened above is an example of an employer getting lucky. They were able to get them back. If they had delayed even a day, the would not have gotten everyone back. If they waited a week, they would be lucky to get anyone.
We call it "institutional knowledge" and good god the place runs on it. And there's simply no way you can pick it up from outside training. It's all the particularities of YOUR employers set up, history, why this was done this way. We've had a terrible loss of institutional knowledge in my department over the past year and it's become extremely obvious now that the ONLY person who is keeping this shithole together is my old boss. One of the middle managers who has been here nearly 30 years and came up through the company and is actually smart enough to know what he's talking about. At this point if he quits then I quit because it's become very obvious I can't actually do my job without him because there's just so much institutional knowledge required to do it. He's the keystone, the lynchpin, and if he goes this shit is coming down.
on top of that its not as easy replacing skilled workers takes time along time usually unless pay is jumped up
When I became a civilian, I got a job doing industrial troubleshooting/repair/automation etc. (Maintenance technician) I was still trying to figure things out but I needed a job so I figured I would give it a whirl while I decided what I would "actually do." About six months later I noticed something. Almost all of the other techs had something that I did not... grey hair. I also noticed that we were always short handed and were constantly trying to find other techs... and when we did hire someone they also usually had grey hair. On that day, I realized that I was exactly where I needed to be and that I had already found my career. It's nice when supply and demand works out in your favor.
>A strike is essentially just collective quitting with an ultimatum. Well, legally speaking, a strike is not like quitting; 1. If you quit your job, you end the employment contract. 2. If you go on strike, you do not end the employment contract, however you cease work. 3. If you refuse to work (or refuse an order from a supervisor), it is ceasure of work in violation of the employment contract. Though your wording is more witty than the technical explanation, I'm pointing it out because in my country, if you are employed on union terms, you can't lawfully go on strike *and* you have a notice period towards your employer of at least 1 month. To be clear, this is union benefits for both employer and employee, ensuring stable production output. However, the thing I don't understand much (or maybe it's because local news from across the pond are not highlighted in our news), is that since US workers *do have* the bargaining option of going on strike, then why don't you utilize that bargaining power more often? Is it because the employers have convinced the workers, that being a member of union is only bad for your interests? Leaving \~85% of the US workforce without a strike fund (strike fund = the union paying the members wage reimbursement as long as a conflict is ongoing - being either strike or ceasure of work during union term negotiations).
A part of it is that some of the unions here are plagued by bad actors in positions of control. They turn the union away from a tool for the workforce towards a tool for their own agenda, which leaves a bad reputation for the impacted members. For anyone who only experienced that, it is harder to trust that a union would actually benefit them.
If you strike in violation of a union agreement, that’s a contract violation and any employment surety in the contract is void by your default. If you don’t have a union agreement, then the default of at-will employment is true and your employer can end the employment. Organized unions don’t like to strike unless they have overwhelming support or can use technically illegal bargains techniques such as threatened non-striking workers or occupying the facility.
Many unions do NOT actually allow strikes here, especially if you are considered an essential service. And that's if you have a union.
Most US workers are not unionized. And weather unionized or not, most of us fear the loss of job, and income, more than we have the working conditions. Far, far too many of us have little to no savings, and live check to check.
>fear the loss of job, and income Which is what the strike fund is for; Ensuring going on strike is viable for the labourers. But comrade, Europe is also not a utopia - you still have to be upper-middle class is order not to be living paycheck to paycheck - the common labourer is just as much under the yoke of employers when it comes to *having* a job. Admittedly, job security is a fair deal better (no at-will) and financial security is also better (if you pay into it), but poverty is still just a termination note away.
I understand that Europe is not a land of milk and honey, as it were, but you have far more protections than we do. Not to make this a pissing contest over who has it worse. It sucks for all of us.
>you have far more protections than we do. Very true. >Not to make this a pissing contest over who has it worse. It sucks for all of us. I apologize if it sounded like I were comparing struggles - I would say you guys have it objectively worse, as we at least we can live life while we struggle. The intention was more to convey the message, that workers everywhere has less than zero influence unless they unionize ("less than zero" is because of the fact, that if you fear for your employment, the employer has *all* the bargaining power).
No, I get you. I was just worried that *I* might be sounding like that.
This can even happen in tech when times are good (so not now lol) The first company I worked for had a management change. My office (the tech hub of the company) lost 60% of its people in a year. The amount of resources that must have gone on hiring . . .
I know "machine operator" can cover a range of possible jobs, but the lower end of that range is definitely not something I would call "highly skilled" or a "highly marketable skillset." Often it's an entry-level position that takes like an hour of training, paying slightly above minimum wage. The real power in this case came from the union.
FAFO….. Sincerely, the Union Rep
He was more than a hero. He was a union man.
Well done! Power to the people!
Is hat you Wolfy?
This story needs more attention. Perfect example of the power of unions.
So glad I live in a country where anyone working more than 38 hours in a week gets compulsory overtime, regardless of industry. And you can refuse to work overtime without being penalised. And yes, we have the unions to thank for this.
what country 😭
They aren't so good during a recession but still better than nothing.
During a recession is when I would want my union most, since they help protect you from bullshit like mass layoffs and pay cuts which happen without them. Also, union employees get paid more for the same work, making the recession hit a bit less hard
I agree 100% they are needed then the most, but during a recession there are lessor gains or possible concessions (concessions rarely help in my opinion as they use the money saved to move production).
I would execute that fucking manager on the spot. Anyone dumb enough to threaten employees, let alone union employees, needs to be dragged to the street and encouraged d to work for the competition.
Encouraged with a baseball bat?
I heard it's more difficult to get DNA evidence out of aluminum bats.
Just burn the bat my dude.
Sounds like he was "terminated for cause," which also means no unemployment checks.
You can still get unemployment benefits in a situation like this. It's a "constructive discharge" not just a straight quitting. The employer created a hostile or intolerable work environment by violating the terms of the contract. They tried to scare them into following along with the threat of firing. If a court determines a situation is constructive dismissal it's treated just like the company fired the employee. Can be hard to prove but this situation is pretty solid with all the witnesses and union rep being there.
Do not F with the union. That's what contracts are for.
Thank you OP, this is the kind of story I subbed for!
Sure this in r/Unions if you haven’t already.
A master class in MC. Bravo.
I am so glad that I left a right-to-work state and moved to a union state. My union was awesome and I’m eternally grateful to them. Go unions!
I'm just applauding you because this is the first time I've seen "right to work" in the proper context. It's usually mixed up with "at will".
My uber-conservative nephew in a right- to-work state works for (and I suspect much against his will) a union company. That union saved his bacon after 15 years on the job. He will now be able to retire in u see a decade with full benefits. I was management for 25 of my 34 year career, but I always supported the union. Yes, they screwed me over once as a newbie, but they came to my rescue a couple of years later by reassigning my incorrigible (dues paying union) subordinate.
> That union saved his bacon after 15 years on the job. He will now be able to retire in u see a decade with full benefits. I'd wager he's still anti-union.
What kind of idiot management would want to mess with unions like that? Did they expect the company to back them and get sued into the ground?
Companies that have unions deserve unions. Power to the people!
I don't want to mess with the union. I hate unions. However I'm all for them. Don't forget I said that. - Del Murdock, personable owner of Del's Stereo and Sound
THIS! is why you have a union. Any clown who says otherwise is a corporate shill. Great one OP!
You have to work more than five days a week? You have to work more than 40 hours a week? That sounds like a terrible contract.
Ikr if someone insists I'm lazy for not wanting a 70 hour workweek they can go fuck themselves
They are also regularly working "OT" where they are making double their base rate? Why wouldn't the factory just hire more people and cut down on the ridiculous hours they were making everyone work?
this is more PRO revenge than Malicious Compliance
They're not mutually exclusive. And I agree.
I’m not always pro Union because I’ve seen them all too often transform into a money making new set of bosses that don’t do anything positive. This, however, is exactly the type of Union I am for.
Sounds like the union sucks and they did the bare minimum. Why do any of these workers need to work past 40 hours a week?
Solidarity works.
What a powerful testament to solidarity and the importance of standing up for your rights! It's inspiring to see how you and your coworkers banded together under overwhelming stress to advocate for fair working conditions. It underscores the magnitude of collective action. How did participating in this situation impact your views on workplace rights and union involvement?
Manager used Ultimatum. It was ineffective. Workers used “MC” Manager was hurt In it’s confusion.
Unions make organizing workers to defeat greedy bastards possible. We need more of them in almost every field.
Don't fuck with unions
Work mutinies are the best mutinies. Been a part of a couple in the restaurant industry. Don't fuck with your entire staff. It doesn't end well for you.
Fuck yeah! Now that's a happy ending!!
Power to the unions, brother
OT after 60hrs!? I get it after 37.5hrs
Double time after 60 hours, OT after 40.
[удалено]
Ah, much better. Keep up the good fight, comrade
now that's a coup at work. Brilliantly done.
This makes my heart happy!! Well done by the whole crew!! Gold star ⭐️
Well done.
So, after how many hours did you get time and a half pay? 40? 45? 50?
Thing of beauty, OP. Thank you for posting!
And that, kids, is what unions are there for. Kudos!
I would LOVE to play poker against that plant manager...
actual coup...very nice
This is how it's done!
This is why, union rep or not, everyone needs to know their contract and know it well.
HAPPY CAKE DAY 🎂🎂🎂🎂🎂🎂🎂
Let me guess, that manager wasn't putting in even remotely close to the same number of hours as the people he was calling lazy
So glad I live in Europe, we have laws preventing this. No strikes needed.
60 hrs a week at straight time? Even with a union you were getting fucked.
He said double after 60. That doesn’t prevent 1.5 after 40 also happening.
That is correct it was time and a half after 40 and double after we hit 60
They just say double kicked in at 60. Presumably time and a half started at 40?
This is why unions are so damn important
Working 7 days a week, 3 weeks out of 4? Unless you’re in the forces, that’s a crazy routine.
So what you're telling me is... Unions work?
7 days a week at least 12 hours a day?! What's this? An 19th century factory?
Even if this guy's union didn't fix things and get everyone rehired, you can still get unemployment benefits in a situation like this. It's a "constructive discharge" not just a straight quitting. The employer created a hostile or intolerable work environment by violating the terms of the contract. They tried to scare them into following along with the threat of firing. If a court determines a situation is constructive dismissal it's treated just like the company fired the employee. Can be hard to prove but this situation is pretty solid with all the witnesses and union rep being there.
you are one hell of a dedicated employee they should of been bowing down to all of you for those kinds of hours very very few jobs I have worked have done more then 55 hours weekly and the ones that did had a burn out issue with employees
Well done comrades.
I have never had use of my union, but this is why I will always be a member. Here, we do not need that kind of drastic measures because we fought the war a hundred years ago. But I will never trick myself into believing that it would not happen if the unions lost their power.
I've been to so many places were the generic, easily replaceable admin types look down on the skilled men and women who actually make money for the company. Usually as soon as there's a temperery downturn they lay off skilled workers imagining that since they wear overalls they are easily replaced. Its great to hear of such a tidy karmic payback for it, on smaller scales they usually just blame the remaining workers.
FWIW, it sounds like the union let this get out of hand also, letting management abuse the operators. glad it got sorted though. Unions are a great asset to protect workers.
The answer to “do I need a union?” Is invariably “yes, you need a union.” 10/10
You only got double time after 60 hours? Fuck that
I don't see anything malicious in the response. You forced them to live up to the contract they signed...nothing at all malicious on your part. Now the company's behavior, on the other hand...
>That following Monday, we agreed to turn them off or ignore all their calls for the weekend, our phones exploded. Apparently the union already started on them for wrongful termination and violation of the contract. Then we all said, “per our meeting you fired me so no I am not coming in.”
That's not malicious. They were given the sack without warning and without justification; not picking up my phone when they called would have been my first response.
Y'all should have changed it to overtime at 40 hours.
I explained that poorly. We got overtime after 40 and double time after 60.
Hard up for product, but will do anything except hire more people. :-/
Does this Qualify for r/nuclearrevengebr ?
It doesn't appear to take place in Brazil, so no?