Post #588676
2026-03-08 19:14 UTC
Replies (3)
-
@brynden_rivers_esq@lemmy.ca 2026-03-08 23:01
I’ve never really watched the guy, so I have no dog in this fight. That’s definitely a dumb-as-nails take. Not anything I wouldn’t expect from someone born to moderate wealth running a company, but not especially malicious.
-
@sinextitan@lemmy.world 2026-03-08 23:37
phrasing, phrasing matters quite a lot. I remember that line being followed up by him stating that he wants the employees to express their concerns instead of outright unionizing. I cannot recall precisely but I do think before all of that he also stated that he feels there exists no need for a union if the workplace is welcoming. I don’t at all remember why the topic was brought up in the first place tho. As I mentioned in my prev comment I feel that if your employees feel a need to unionize then they’re past civil discussions and also it feels to me like sweeping the incident under the rug so they don’t land in hot water. but perhaps I am too red pilled by the rest of the bs that’s going on.
-
@Lfrith@lemmy.ca 2026-03-09 14:26
Of course any owner who stands to make millions in comparison to his employees wouldn’t want a union, and prefer them to be content with what’s given than to start demanding more pay and less hours. Can try to pretty it up as if it would mean a personal failure as a boss. But, it really comes down to hoping to play up the good boss angle who cares to avoid the nightmare scenario of having to share more of the money with labor and not wanting to lose leverage that a boss has over labor that isn’t unionized. No union is more power and more money. That’s the non PR answer without the flowery language.