LogFAQs > #976408717

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, Database 12 ( 11.2023-? ), Clear
Topic List
Page List: 1
TopicNewsom vetoes bill, SAG strikers won't get unemployment benefits
MrToothHasYou
10/01/23 9:20:24 AM
#36:


You guys are not understanding the point of getting UI to pay striking workersits not double dipping, and most unions DO already pay stipends to striking workers (WGA and SAG are technically guilds, not unions, so Im not 100% sure how their strike fund works). This would just allow the unions strike fund to stretch further. UI usually covers something like 70% of your previous wages for a certain period, usually six months. If the striking workers can qualify for that, then the union doesnt need to pay as much to keep its members afloat. This means the cash reserves set aside for strike funds will last much longer, and gives the union more leverage in negotiating a new contract.

This whole actually, unions are just as bad as the companies schtick is fucking bonkers.

---
(he/him)
"The hopeless don't revolt, because revolution is an act of hope."
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1