It’s both. Trust me.
Having worked in a union shop where we were constantly told we should think ourselves lucky to have a job and there was no money for raises or any other benefits for more than a decade, and they even broke us in bankruptcy proceedings, but when faced with a huge worker shortfall they started throwing huge wage bumps, bonuses, and rapid career advancement tracks to attract new people…fuck them. The money is always there when it matters to them.
Cruel@programming.dev 1 hour ago
It’s ultimately about money though. If they believed ceding power/control to workers would get them more money, they’d do it. Workers are rarely invested in corporate success unless their pay is also tied to it. And even then, they’re not nearly as invested as the founders and initial investors.
hector@lemmy.today 6 minutes ago
There is something to preventing the union in the first place. In the same way they oppose single payer health care. They pay out of the nose, more than civilized countries’ employers pay for better health insurance, but they oppose it out of general dickish principle. They are good tribal pricks, and that is what the tribe expects. That follows to almost all of the tribes too, it’s only our little junior tribes that the big tribe has nothing but contempt and fear and hate for, that supports paying less money for more and better health care.
Because of Tribal Loyalties, same as with Unions, it’s the principle of the matter and they don’t want to be seen as the first ones to cave. Then John Galt might not bring them to liberatiland where they obviously prosper because they are so much more capable than all of the schlepps they abuse by virtue of being hired as a dickhead higher up.