Support LA grocery workers

[RGacky3]

Here it goes again (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/21/california-grocery_n_932410.html?ir=Los%20Angeles), I hope they strike, and strike hard, and I hope truckers join them, everyone in LA do what you can to help, bringing food or drinks, or even just kind words to strikers at the lines helps a lot, don't underestimate the power of community support for strikers, just small things like that make a huge differnce in empowering workers to keep going and get whats theirs, not shopping at striking stores, convincing scabs to join the strikers, if your in a union call for solidarity action, talk to your rep.

Unions and strikes and other workers actions are the backbone of worker empowerment and socialism, these things are THE most important things you can support.

[Baseball]

Here it goes again (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/21/california-grocery_n_932410.html?ir=Los%20Angeles), I hope they strike, and strike hard, and I hope truckers join them, everyone in LA do what you can to help, bringing food or drinks, or even just kind words to strikers at the lines helps a lot, don't underestimate the power of community support for strikers, just small things like that make a huge differnce in empowering workers to keep going and get whats theirs, not shopping at striking stores, convincing scabs to join the strikers, if your in a union call for solidarity action, talk to your rep.

Unions and strikes and other workers actions are the backbone of worker empowerment and socialism, these things are THE most important things you can support.


A poor piece of journalism-- the grocery and union agree on a deal except how much employee contribution to health care insurance. The employer offer would still mean employees are paying less than most other Californians for health insurance.
But then comes the sticking point: The union says that they are concerned with the long term sustainability of the health insurance fund.

Left unasked:
1. Why would not an increase in their share of contribution help stabilise it, if in fact that concern is valid?
2. Does the union want the employer to increase its contribution, so that the net effect is that the increased union contribution does not reflect a percentage increase in health care contribution in total?
3. What exactly is the employer opinion on the union claim as to the shaky nature of the health care fund?

[RGacky3]

The employer offer would still mean employees are paying less than most other Californians for health insurance.



yes, because most other Californians are getting screwed because they don't have union representation, this argument I hear all the time, but its bullshit, (union workers have it better than other workers, so they should'nt complain), no they should, and so should non-unoin workers, the fact that non-union workers get screwed more is juts a testiment to unions.


1. Why would not an increase in their share of contribution help stabilise it, if in fact that concern is valid?


It would be basically a pay cut, as long as these companies are making serious profits, they can and should be held accountable to pay their health insurance, and the workers should strike until they get it, rather than workers taking a pay cut, when they can afford it less than the company.

No it would'nt, because taking money from workers is not nearly as much money as taking it from the companies profit.


2. Does the union want the employer to increase its contribution, so that the net effect is that the increased union contribution does not reflect a percentage increase in health care contribution in total?


They don't want them to increase the contribution (They should demand it though), they don't want them to cut their contribution.


3. What exactly is the employer opinion on the union claim as to the shaky nature of the health care fund?

They basically want to have workers pay more, so that ultimately they can fade it out, as the fund has less money (because the company pays less) and more of the burden comes on the worrkers.

You should support union strikes no matter what they ask for, considering they are part of the market.

[Baseball]

You should support union strikes no matter what they ask for, considering they are part of the market.


Not sure how one follows from the other.

[RGacky3]

You'll never criticize a company or a corporation for maximising profits, why would you criticize a union for maximising wages or benefits?

[Baseball]

You'll never criticize a company or a corporation for maximising profits, why would you criticize a union for maximising wages or benefits?


Well, I guess that falls under Samuel Gompers definition of organized labor "more."

By all means, strike. But just like the employer faces a threshold for maximizing profits, thus does a union.

[RGacky3]

Well, I guess that falls under Samuel Gompers definition of organized labor "more."


What it should be is "all"


By all means, strike. But just like the employer faces a threshold for maximizing profits, thus does a union.

The difference is the employer is trying to pull more and more out of the worker and consumer (profit) and gain a larger and larger market share.

Whereas the Union is trying to get a larger and larger share of the revenue that they produce.

[Baseball]

The difference is the employer is trying to pull more and more out of the worker and consumer (profit) and gain a larger and larger market share.

Whereas the Union is trying to get a larger and larger share of the revenue that they produce.



Isn't the revenue coming from the consumer anyways, even in the socialist community?
Why is it ok for the union to extract as much revenue as possible from the consumer, but a problem for the capitalist to do the same?

[RGacky3]

Isn't the revenue coming from the consumer anyways, even in the socialist community?
Why is it ok for the union to extract as much revenue as possible from the consumer, but a problem for the capitalist to do the same?

Because they are not extracting it from the consumer, they are extracting it from the surplus profit that the capitalist is hoarding.

[Baseball]

Because they are not extracting it from the consumer, they are extracting it from the surplus profit that the capitalist is hoarding.

And after capitalism has been abolished?

[RGacky3]

No, right now.

[NoOneIsIllegal]

If you support unions, why did you link to Huffington Post? Pretty sure the writers union is on strike...

[RGacky3]

I did not know that they were on strike, my apologies if they are.

[Baseball]

No, right now.


So what good is denouncing capitalism-right now- for iniquities when socialism itself has no other solution for that stated problem?

[RGacky3]

What are you talking about?

I'm saying striking workers are trying to extract more money from profits when they strike right now under capitalism .... Follow along.

[RGacky3]

http://socialistworker.org/2011/09/14/a-new-grocery-labor-war

Labor struggles are THE most important economic struggles imo.

[Drosophila]

Also don't forget about the Car Wash workers. They're being poisoned, underpaid (even not paid at all), and harassed by their bosses.