• barsoap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year 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
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year 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
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year 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
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year 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.