D’en dag dat die kapitalisten begrip gaan opbrengen voor de modale mens ….
“Business AM” post artikel tegen vakbonden. Wie had dat verwacht?
Who do they need to reach in order for this to work? Where do they try to hurt them every single time?
If you ever find an answer to the first question that is hurt badly by the things that answer the second question, let me know
Who do they need to reach in order for this to work? Where do they try to hurt them every single time?
If you ever find an answer to the first question that is hurt badly by the things that answer the second question, let me know
De dag dat vakbonden echt opkomen voor werkende mensen zullen ze veel meer sympathie krijgen van mij.
Neen hoor – we zijn er enkel voor werklozen en ambetantenaren.
In de privé zie je ook heel af en toe een vakbondsmens. Dat is dan meestal iemand die weet dat hij ontslagen zou worden als hij niet beschermd zou zijn door zijn statuut.
Most strikes and actions hurt regular people most. Trains and buses cancelled, creches closed, travellers inconvenienced…
The people who suffer the consequences of the strikes, bear no responsibility for the cause. So why would they support it? Knowing that they are not going to benefit from it either and will probably the ones to pay for it.
The unions operate under the belief that society supports their cause and thus supports their actions too. And, that people will overcome the inconvenience because of solidarity. But they are wrong.
I grew up with strikes meaning cancelled trains, study halls, blocked roads… And TV showed boomers wearing red and green being happy about it all.
Yes, the unions fought for essential rights and were a force for good. But that does not mean everything they do is good. And lately they seem to be fighting mainly to get privileges, not rights. Privileges for older members. Early retirement, no reforms whatsoever, no individual bargaining, entrenching their rights… They seem to be fighting against the younger generations, who will have to pay the bill in a drastically weakened economy.
Every strike is the unions flexing their muscles. But those muscles are starting to look a bit flabby.
So, what should they do instead? How do they fix this?
First of all, marketing. Proper marketing that explains an issue and offers solutions. And makes it clear that they tried negotiating and are reasonable in their demands. No slogans that are easily discredited.
Secondly, actions focused on getting sympathy rather than harming people, while still being negative for the company. For instance, refuse to sell tickets for buses, trams and trains and refuse to check if anyone has a ticket. Refuse to wear a full uniform but replace part of it with something noticeable. Actions that would get attention and sympathy.
Third, focus on actual issues. Not just on the preservation and expansion of existing privileges that benefit a small group but damage another. Find out what the actual concerns in society are and fight for a fix that will benefit all.
6 comments
D’en dag dat die kapitalisten begrip gaan opbrengen voor de modale mens ….
“Business AM” post artikel tegen vakbonden. Wie had dat verwacht?
Who do they need to reach in order for this to work? Where do they try to hurt them every single time?
If you ever find an answer to the first question that is hurt badly by the things that answer the second question, let me know
Who do they need to reach in order for this to work? Where do they try to hurt them every single time?
If you ever find an answer to the first question that is hurt badly by the things that answer the second question, let me know
De dag dat vakbonden echt opkomen voor werkende mensen zullen ze veel meer sympathie krijgen van mij.
Neen hoor – we zijn er enkel voor werklozen en ambetantenaren.
In de privé zie je ook heel af en toe een vakbondsmens. Dat is dan meestal iemand die weet dat hij ontslagen zou worden als hij niet beschermd zou zijn door zijn statuut.
Most strikes and actions hurt regular people most. Trains and buses cancelled, creches closed, travellers inconvenienced…
The people who suffer the consequences of the strikes, bear no responsibility for the cause. So why would they support it? Knowing that they are not going to benefit from it either and will probably the ones to pay for it.
The unions operate under the belief that society supports their cause and thus supports their actions too. And, that people will overcome the inconvenience because of solidarity. But they are wrong.
I grew up with strikes meaning cancelled trains, study halls, blocked roads… And TV showed boomers wearing red and green being happy about it all.
Yes, the unions fought for essential rights and were a force for good. But that does not mean everything they do is good. And lately they seem to be fighting mainly to get privileges, not rights. Privileges for older members. Early retirement, no reforms whatsoever, no individual bargaining, entrenching their rights… They seem to be fighting against the younger generations, who will have to pay the bill in a drastically weakened economy.
Every strike is the unions flexing their muscles. But those muscles are starting to look a bit flabby.
So, what should they do instead? How do they fix this?
First of all, marketing. Proper marketing that explains an issue and offers solutions. And makes it clear that they tried negotiating and are reasonable in their demands. No slogans that are easily discredited.
Secondly, actions focused on getting sympathy rather than harming people, while still being negative for the company. For instance, refuse to sell tickets for buses, trams and trains and refuse to check if anyone has a ticket. Refuse to wear a full uniform but replace part of it with something noticeable. Actions that would get attention and sympathy.
Third, focus on actual issues. Not just on the preservation and expansion of existing privileges that benefit a small group but damage another. Find out what the actual concerns in society are and fight for a fix that will benefit all.
They’ll need to, if they want to survive.