Thank you for this perspective;
sincerely thanks.
The mismanagement of Canada Post is legendary. Instead of restructuring or learning about modernising, they (management/bureaucrats) just cut more & more corners / services without tackling Root-problems (managerial issues such as poor management).
Anyway, I’ll re-read your post after I’ve calmed down from having gone postal in my previous post.
[edit] I didn’t say they were greedy, just that the strike is having an adverse impact on people who can little afford any impact — low income, retirees etc.
As a freelancer, it is true that what I’m offered per/word today is the same amount I made in 1997.
Again thanks for your input.
No worries mate. I'm the kind of leftist that will speak passionately about my beliefs, but will not exclude anybody for having different beliefs.
Solidarity requires allowing people to come to your side in conversation. To attack the man or woman who holds the beliefs is counter-productive. That is, unless it's an individual with a vested interest in maintaining the death-grip stranglehold on labor that allows the managerial class to ignore the material needs of those beneath them.
I didn't mean to imply that you said they were greedy: that's exclusively a critique of our media ecosystem. It's a framing device that I find extremely cynical and yet, it's everywhere. The folks who *do* make that accusation and broadcast it to the masses are not doing so because they think greed is a bad thing, but do so with the understanding that the average person will consider greed to be a moral deficit.
Paint your enemies with your own sins. It's propoganda 101.
I do understand the pain this causes folks: if it didn't cause pain, there would be no impetus to change. Our world is built in such a way that shipping and logistics touches so many facets of our lives: the folks that do this work are absolutely necessary to the functioning of our society. When they go away, folks don't get their checks. Medications don't get delivered to hospitals. At the most extreme ends lives can, potentially, be lost.
This is a heavy, *heavy* consideration for those in this sector. It's part of the conditions that allow for the abuse of logistics workers: you don't want people to die, do you? So take whatever pittance we give you and get back to work. Oh, and he *thankful* for the opportunity to do so.
It's a kind of leverage that, when utilized in a system that so venerates greed at the highest levels, makes for some truly evil outcomes. It is akin to Sophie's choice. Management knows this, and they know that if they can shift the blame for this to the striking workers that they can weaken their cause.
Not that I mean to imply that those in management are evil: they are simply responding to incentives. If they can crush the strike, they can keep prices artificially low while continuing to reap the benefits of under compensated labor. And they can justify their actions by shifting the blame to the workers beneath them, as they do not have to live with or directly experience the worker's circumstances. It is an evil *system*, the folks that exist in it are just doing their jobs.
There exists a fundamental power imbalance between employer and employee. The employee has skills that are specialized for a job and transitioning careers is fraught with peril. Loss of income directly correlates to loss of food, shelter, all the things that we need to survive. For an employer, the attitude is always "we'll just find somebody else".
The *only* power workers have (within legal bounds) is to unite and withhold labor. What if there is no "somebody else?". They, together, face the hardships of their shared loss of income in order to harm the only thing that will make management take notice: their bottom line. Profits.
It's always a gamble to see who will blink first. There is a considerable chunk of society that subscribes to the Ayn-Randian belief that it is not the workers who make society function, but the great men. The John Galts. Those folks recoil at the damage a strike can do to this worldview and often, rather than finding common ground and working to find mutually beneficial outcomes, they will plant their feet in the mud until they have absolutely no choice but concede.
To paraphrase Mark Twain, it is virtually impossible to convince a person of a truth to which their livelihood depends on them not understanding that truth.
Believe me: I wish we lived in a world where workers could exercise their rights in such a way that there was no collateral damage to those not involved in the dispute. It would be a better world. But workers are not the only ones that exist in this system, and the other side holds *almost all* the cards.
I mean, beyond withholding labor, the only other options available to us are more direct forms of property damage. Which I won't say if I endorse or not in case the FBI is on here.
*Edit*:
And just to make sure I'm being clear, I say all this with love and acceptance of you, Crazy Cat. No malice, no judgment, no shame. Just conversation. Rock on brotha.
