• @Snowcano
    link
    2710 months ago

    There are different unions for different trades. Stop trying to sound so smart, you keep failing.

    • @barsoap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      310 months ago

      Oh, great, trade unions. That never caused any issues for worker’s unity. If you can’t organise everyone, from tech lead to cleaning staff, in the same industrial union you’re playing right into the capitalists’ divide and conquer game.

      • @crapwittyname@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        5
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Not so. It makes sense to organise in trade unions. The heads of those unions are on the same side most of the time, as it would be in this case, and they can easily coordinate their actions. But in some cases the interests of one trade have no bearing on another, or are even in opposition, in which case it would be somewhere between difficult and impossible to organise a balloted action across the entire union. Thus nullifying the strength of the union and playing right into the capitalist’s hands.

        • @barsoap@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          210 months ago

          So instead of coming to terms with your fellow workers you rather have them fight capitalists by themselves? Leave them to the scraps the bosses deem sufficient while you’re wheeling away a wagonload of concessions won through your unique bargaining power?

          You’re limiting the strength of worker’s. If train conductors don’t strike for train toilet cleaners noone will.

          And any opposition between worker’s interests is negligible compared to that between workers and capital, who have no interests in common at all.

          • @crapwittyname@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            310 months ago

            You’ve misread my comment I think. Unions can coordinate and organise together. So nobody would be leaving their fellow worker to fight by themselves.