Mark your calendars

    • BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      1 year ago

      Best news I’ve heard all year! A general strike is probably one of our best ways to radicalize the masses. I’m fuckin pumped

  • roguetrick@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    A general strike would result in the fall of the federal government. Secondary action is illegal because it’s so powerful. This is an interesting way to get around that, with every contract just happening to align with the other.

  • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    … is this satire? Why the fuck would you give four years of warning for managers to document “a slow accumulation of poor performance” and other bullshit to shit can pro-union employees. A large strike takes coordination, but four years is ridiculous.

    • theluddite@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      76
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      4 years seems reasonable to me. It takes most organizations six months to do literally anything outside the status quo. A general strike is an attempt to organize a coalition of federations of organizations.

      Why the fuck would you give four years of warning for managers to document “a slow accumulation of poor performance” and other bullshit to shit can pro-union employees.

      This is the reality of striking. The threat and build up to the strike are just as important as the actual strike, because it’s about more than just not going to work; it involves complex and wide-ranging logistical question, from how to support the strikers (otherwise corps can just wait you out) to how to decide on a single list of demands.

      The very real threats you describe are what make outspoken union advocates awesome and brave people that we should all look up to, and it’s why we all have a responsibility to express solidarity and never cross a picket line. Together we bargain; alone we beg!

      • glimse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        47
        ·
        1 year ago

        The reasoning you described can be summed up very simply: UAW doesn’t want to strike, they want changes. And they hope the threat alone is enough to get them.

    • gibmiser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nah I think it’s a good move. Gives unions time to decide on demands and get big enough to really scare those in power.

    • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I know you seemed to have gotten the gist for why it’s been announced so far out, but there’s some other things at play here.

      1. Actual general strikes are illegal under the Taft-Hartley act
      2. US unions generally engage in contract negotiations at different times, and set the specific date the contract expires during the negotiation
      3. In a country of 333 million people, a general strike will take A LOT of planning. Even if only 10% of the country went on strike, it would easily be the largest strike in world history. The entire economy will stop and people will need to be taken care of.
      • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Even if only 10% of the country went on strike, it would easily be the largest strike in world history. The entire economy will stop and people will need to be taken care of.

        I am not brash enough to assert any prediction, but such an event as you describe would be momentus, of coordinating protection and distribution on so massive a scale, completely alternative to the systems of the establishment. A successful demonstration of such kind would be transformative in our culture, producing an unprecedented expansion of collectively perceived horizons of possibility for the future.

        • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Absolutely! A strike that large could result in a syndicalist revolution. Laying the groundwork to support that many people in a socialist framework would be an incredible feat, comparable to the Paris commune within that historical context

    • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 year ago

      Solidarity and action requires communication. There’s NO way to coordinate that type of collective action and keep it secret.

      Much better to say it loud and often to build support.

      • snooggums@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, they are just letting the companies know that they will be ready for the next round and that they aren’t going to accept less than their value like they were in past negotiations.

    • Fraylor@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      I imagine part of it is to try and take the time to gather as much support as possible, likely to include re-educating ground level bootlicker employees who hate unions and their own self interests.

      • keefshape@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is a really smart thing, though. Any unions that align contract dates with UAW and others who also do so, gains a huge lever to use both now and later.

      • woodenskewer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        He’s speaking as a union rep, I get what you’re saying but he just can’t call a general strike. It would take years alone to get different trade union contracts to align to expire on the same year to get what he wants to do across. For example I’m in a steelworker union and my contract expires in 2027. If we sign a new contract in 2027 and participate in a general strike it wouldn’t be backed by our union and could be punishable. However if they vote to extend the current contract 1 year near the end of the contract (very likely) we would actually have steelworkers and auto workers contracts expiring on the same year which could be interesting if these assholes actually communicated with each other union to union.

        Sorry if you knew all this but I took your comment as in a “why not sooner?” or “what are they waiting for?” context so I felt compelled to answer.

  • kase@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is awesome, but idk if they’re even printing 2028 calendars yet lol

  • doublejay1999@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Would be interesting. A peaceful general strike would lead to military intervention in about 45-60 days I think.

    • theluddite@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’d say less than a week. Capitalism is something that we have to wake up and make happen every single day. How many days worth of food does the average person have? Definitely not 45 days. People would have to start self-organizing within 2-3 days, and in doing so, they would actively make something that isn’t capitalism, which directly challenges those in power.

      This is why every time there are emergencies or protests, the media is obsessed with “looting.” If there’s no food because of a hurricane or whatever, it is every single person’s duty to redistribute what there is equitably. The news and capitalists (but I repeat myself) call that “looting,” even when it’s a well-organized group of neighbors going into a closed store to distribute spoiling food to hungry people.

      Rebecca Solnit writes about this in detail in A Paradise Built in Hell. It’s really good. She’s an awesome writer.

        • theluddite@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I love her. You know all of those outlets that try to respond how all the news is bad by doing good news, but it’s always just the orphan crushing machine all over again?

          Solnit is like an actually rigorous and deeply insightful version of what that thinks it is doing. I think she herself would push back on anyone who says she tries to figure out “human nature,” but insomuch as that’s a meaningful thing to do, that’s what she does. The book’s central aim is to investigate what human beings are actually like when existing social expectations and power structures are removed, and it’s both well-researched and surprisingly optimistic.

      • aodhsishaj@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are already mutual aid networks out there, food banks, community gardens, and neighborhood associations. The seeds are planted and the soil is fecund and ready. You cannot crush what is already dirt.

        • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is still much building needed for the networks and groups. The start is good, but participation and organization is currently still quite basic.

      • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The publicity offers a motive for entry into local organization by many not yet joined.

        Current conditions, as of today, would leave much of the population vulnerable, in case of loss of the established order, and much of the rest inclined to the brutality that produces such vulnerability.

    • Fraylor@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      That long? Ain’t no way the shareholders would let the government stay on its leash long enough to tank an entire fiscal quarter

      Will somebody think of the economy?!

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      A peaceful general strike would lead to military intervention in about 45-60 days I think.

      But at the end of the day, how do you task society to forcibly work?

      Everyone can just start taking sick days, what’s the Army going to do, go to door?

      • CADmonkey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        If I had to guess, I’d say the actual answer isn’t jail but “start shooting” while also pumping propoganda about those lazy union guys who just don’t want to work.

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Fucking exactly. We’re only allowed to have small relief valves to prevent riots, we aren’t allowed to actually fight for a better future.

    • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      A political, solidarity, secondary strike etc. is where a union or group under an in-force bargaining agreement are not allowed to strike just because their friends/fellow workers are striking. While not under a collective agreement then they can strike. If everyone’s agreement expires simultaneously, then it is possible for any or every group to strike.

    • dangblingus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Okay. The police will just have to arrest hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people all across the country then.

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      An interesting read, thank you for sharing.

      The anti-communism slant in the law was slightly humorous to read, as it shows you the times in which the law was written.