The poster knows that, their point is unmitigated wealth concentrating org design inherent to capitalist structures shouldn’t be permitted without oppositional balance, unions would be a minimum instance of that in an economy and society not deeply ill.
That wasn’t what I was suggesting, but it could absolutely be part of a standard company organization. How do you think regular companies are formed? They have a plan for product or service, get sales, plan operations, and have a management and/or governance structure. In many countries it’s common for unions to have management/board representation to provide essential input on employee issues, perspective and needs. Any company looking for a long-term business plan would do well to integrate these.
Well, then create balance. I’m not saying it shouldn’t happen, but it’s not the fault of the company in this case. It shouldn’t be necessary, but we’re not living in an utopia.
Mercedes, itself, in Germany has jarringly different relations with its unions, in a much more positive way–that is to say the current lack of “Utopia” as you call it, is absolutely conscious decision and they don’t just get off free for structuring their US business units as such.
The idea that companies should have inherently oppositional relationships with unions or organized labor is extreme and has been encouraged, lobbied for, violently supported with private police forces and abduction of public ones, and aggressively fomented by maniac capitalists in the US.
The poster knows that, their point is unmitigated wealth concentrating org design inherent to capitalist structures shouldn’t be permitted without oppositional balance, unions would be a minimum instance of that in an economy and society not deeply ill.
So people would need to get together and create a union before a company can be started? How would that even work?
That wasn’t what I was suggesting, but it could absolutely be part of a standard company organization. How do you think regular companies are formed? They have a plan for product or service, get sales, plan operations, and have a management and/or governance structure. In many countries it’s common for unions to have management/board representation to provide essential input on employee issues, perspective and needs. Any company looking for a long-term business plan would do well to integrate these.
Well, then create balance. I’m not saying it shouldn’t happen, but it’s not the fault of the company in this case. It shouldn’t be necessary, but we’re not living in an utopia.
Mercedes, itself, in Germany has jarringly different relations with its unions, in a much more positive way–that is to say the current lack of “Utopia” as you call it, is absolutely conscious decision and they don’t just get off free for structuring their US business units as such.
The idea that companies should have inherently oppositional relationships with unions or organized labor is extreme and has been encouraged, lobbied for, violently supported with private police forces and abduction of public ones, and aggressively fomented by maniac capitalists in the US.
That’s not because they love us Germans so much, that’s because we took it and fought for it. Be the change you want to see.