Current Events > Kellogg's attempts to replace striking workers with scabs go HILARIOUSLY bad.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Yeah that makes me really want to support unions.

one of those words never spoken once by someone until they see it on twitter and repeat it ad nauseum to sound like they've always been on the team

scabs if the term was used properly, would not be applying for the job, they'd be returning to the job... So what you're saying is fuck people who want to work... It is not the responsibility of the general public to support some random collective's demands of an employer... IF you do not like the employment conditions but there are people who are willing to accept those conditions, then your strike should fail, that's what determines whether or not your worker's strike is frivolous or not...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/6/6/3/AAW8UqAACryv.jpg

scabs if the term was used properly, would not be applying for the job, they'd be returning to the job... So what you're saying is fuck people who want to work.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/6/6/3/AAW8UqAACryv.jpg

What a weird interpretation, considering the term "scab" has been around for over a century and has been a central component to innumerable high-visibility strikes, has been featured in media since the dawn of Hollywood and radio, and is in the general lexicon of nearly every working class person in the English speaking world.

So now they shut down an application system to prevent adults who need work and would consent to the conditions of the job from being able to apply and potentially work to feed their families. Yeah that makes me really want to support unions. l m a o.

The amount of people who want workers to be exploited is way too high.

Because you are free to reject that employment.

Imagine still pulling this shit out your ass because you just learned what scab meant today. Just take the L and close your account already.

You can't exploit someone who consents to the conditions of the employment. They have just as much power as the employer with regard to accepting these conditions.

a union is just a collective agreement by people with learned skills to reject employment with poor conditions

Your naivety about worker exploitation is cute.

Yes but they are notorious for doing things to prevent people from accepting the conditions that they reject which is clearly unfair.

Yes but they are notorious for doing things to prevent people from accepting the conditions that they reject which is clearly unfair.

You can't exploit someone who consents to the conditions of the employment. They have just as much power as the employer with regard to accepting these conditions.

No you see it doesn't work that way, you're replying out of anger because you don't like what I'm saying... Because it is uncomfortable for your kind of people to have their own inherent ineptitude revealed to them.

The reason it's exploitation is because most adults don't have the option to just not work. It's not true consent if the alternative is starving to death or living a miserable life. Furthermore, most workers in the US can't negotiate for better working conditions.

I guess we can add narcissism along with naivety.

That's the magic of competition, if an employer can't get people to work for them because of another employers far more favorable working conditions, then they better shape up.

Except the reality of the modern US is that most US workers have no choice but to end up in a job with some combination of poor pay relative to cost of living, more than 40 hour work weeks, awful working conditions, and the possibility of being abruptly laid off due to no fault of their own. Competition has NOT lead to opportunities for good jobs for most workers.

People like him live in their parent's basement oblivious to the world around them and then think they know all the answers.

It's always funny when they try to engage in discussions about serious issues because you can see how coddled they are about the real world.