Also Joining a Silicon Valley Union: Waymo's Food Service Employees (nbcnews.com) 89
"Food service employees at the autonomous driving company Waymo are forming a union," reports NBC News, calling it "the latest push by support workers to organize at Silicon Valley's most prominent companies."
The cafeteria workers at the Mountain View-based company cite the high cost of living in the Bay Area and the lack of strong benefits while working for one of the world's most valuable companies. Waymo is owned by Google parent company, Alphabet.
The workers are employed by Sodexo, which contracts service work for Google and other companies. Organizers say they have a majority of union cards signed from the roughly two dozen-person bargaining unit....
Workers say the $24 an hour they make from the company is not enough to live adequately in the Bay Area. They also cite the prohibitive cost of the company's health plan, which has a $5,000 deductible. The living wage in the San Jose-Sunnyvale area is $27.74 for a single adult, and $52.74 for a single adult with a child, according to MIT's living wage calculator.... The workers are part of Silicon Valley's ranks of contractors who support and supplement the work at tech companies. Union campaigns have coursed through the industry as tech company profits — and the cost of living in the Bay Area — have escalated steeply in recent years.
At Google, more than 4,000 of these workers have joined unions since 2018, including 2,300 cafeteria workers at its headquarters and satellite offices in the Bay Area in 2019, according to Unite Here.... "[Workers] see all the money around tech," said D. Taylor, the president of Unite Here. "And that's great. But they want to have a piece of the American dream."
Ironically, one of the workers said they were inspired by Hasan Piker, who NBC News describes as "a leftist Twitch streamer and political commentator" with large followings on Twitter — and on Google-owned YouTube.
The workers are employed by Sodexo, which contracts service work for Google and other companies. Organizers say they have a majority of union cards signed from the roughly two dozen-person bargaining unit....
Workers say the $24 an hour they make from the company is not enough to live adequately in the Bay Area. They also cite the prohibitive cost of the company's health plan, which has a $5,000 deductible. The living wage in the San Jose-Sunnyvale area is $27.74 for a single adult, and $52.74 for a single adult with a child, according to MIT's living wage calculator.... The workers are part of Silicon Valley's ranks of contractors who support and supplement the work at tech companies. Union campaigns have coursed through the industry as tech company profits — and the cost of living in the Bay Area — have escalated steeply in recent years.
At Google, more than 4,000 of these workers have joined unions since 2018, including 2,300 cafeteria workers at its headquarters and satellite offices in the Bay Area in 2019, according to Unite Here.... "[Workers] see all the money around tech," said D. Taylor, the president of Unite Here. "And that's great. But they want to have a piece of the American dream."
Ironically, one of the workers said they were inspired by Hasan Piker, who NBC News describes as "a leftist Twitch streamer and political commentator" with large followings on Twitter — and on Google-owned YouTube.
Only $5k deductible health plan? (Score:2)
I got the best plan available at my company and it has an $8k deductible. Wtf? I understand their complaint about pay rate (my answer: move away), but there's nothing horrible about that health plan compared to others.
Re: (Score:2)
I know this comment is totally bad faith but unironically yes to all those things.
And not "free" as in magical fairy free but in terms of healthcare it's generally "free at point of service". The payment comes from taxes and standardized payments which in a single payer or even multi payer system the funds come from the massive expansion of people in the insurance pool. Everyone pays and everyone gets, rich and poor alike.
This makes sense for healthcare because its demand is wildly inelastic so normal ma
Re:Only $5k deductible health plan? (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't link me an almost 90 minute video as evidence of something and then hang all your arguments off of that. Why not ask me to read a book as well? That's lke a socialist refusing to argue and just telling me to read Das Capital, it's kinda silly. If you watched it and understood it than make the argument.
Even if i take your stats as true there are 214m working age people in America as of 2020. If half are men 3.5m is around 3% that might not be disabled. If half of that number are actually disabled are looking at around 1% that you are going to dismiss every single economic, social and humane benefit of a more advanced welfare state because 1% of people might be lazy.
If your argument is true we should see wild unemplyment numbers in the Nordics and other countries with expanded wealfare state and social services, but we don't.
Honestly you are willing to look past continuing, unnecassry human misery to keep 1 out of 100 people from possibly, maybe, getting something you deem they do not deserve. There is not a economic or social argument really to be made, just an emotional one. Glad the feelings over facts crowd is out in force still!
Re: (Score:1)
You should watch that video and the second one, clearly it provides more information than I would be willing to put down on a page here, that's the point of the video, to compress information into useful format. You would also learn the answers to your questions if you watch the video, it addresses them (Nordic countries, like Sweden). To say that 7 million work aged men is irrelevant to the economy is quite disingenuous, however there is a clear *trend* that is shown in the data in the video, the trend i
Re: (Score:2)
First off you didn't post a second video, and second I might watch it but that does nothing to sustain your argument nor does it address any of the points I made.
Also how is it that this trend is increasing when America as it stands today does not in fact provide any real amount of ability to live off the government dole, especially single men without kids. Are they getting workers comp? UI isn't pereptual and you had to have been working to get it. Are you saying it's a vast amount of disability fraud?
Re: (Score:1)
Of-course I posted the second video. Here is the comment: https://slashdot.org/comments.... [slashdot.org]
this is the second video once again from that comment https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
My argument stays the same, disability funds people not to work and you are proposing more methods of funding people not to work. Millions of work age people are not working because they can do so because of all the money that is redirected to them. This is in a society, where so many are complaining that 'the rich do not pay the
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, it's heartwarming how people from the so-called worst shitholes in America band together to help people in need, while our coastal elites heap endless bitter hatred on them. And yet, somehow in their own minds they're the good guys.
"Piled before the tyrant is a feast of kingly proportions, like a Thanksgiving Day feast flowing across his dinner table. You sit quietly without access to the table, but in your hands you do hold a little crust of bread. This is all you have and you cradle it carefully b
Re: (Score:1)
Found an update on Men Without Work from the 19th of September, 2022 https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com] so this is *now*, the collapse of men who are not in the work force has worsened (obviously, especially given the pandemic situation). There are now millions of job positions that are not filled, but fewer men in their prime ages (25-54) work today than ever.
So again, men choose not to work with more and more ways that were invented for them to receive funds from the government, so no surprise that the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Data shows that easily over 7000000 (7 million) men ages 25-54 do nothing but watch videos and play video games and that the trend is in that direction. That is entirely too many people of working age who choose to do nothing. I think the data is clear, give people a way to live while not working and you shouldn't expect them to work any longer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
What is the point of it? Why give someone something at all if it wouldn't be enough to exist on in the first place? More to the point, why give people of working age and who have their arms and legs in place any money, for what purpose? Why not expect people to work like everyone always did and in case someone is unable to work at all to deal with their problem on a case basis?
Re: Only $5k deductible health plan? (Score:2)
Prepare for the king who will charge you to breathe.
Re: (Score:2)
I can make absurd arguments, too.
Re: Only $5k deductible health plan? (Score:2)
Fuckin hell, why even work for them if it's that much? My out of pocket maximum at my previous job was only $4,000, and that was with a company most of you have never even heard of. If they told me there was a $5,000 deductible, I'd decline the job offer. If they said $8,000 I'd laugh and say "seriously though, how much is it?"
Re: (Score:2)
For the average person they will never hit $8k without a hospital stay. Cheaper to not pay the insurance. But then if you get sick or T-boned in a car accident you’re fucked.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on the person, I have coworkers who hit their max every year and others who never see their doctor.
Aaron Z
Re: (Score:1)
Depends on the person, I have coworkers who hit their max every year and others who never see their doctor.
Aaron Z
It's easy to do in the US.. On the there hand, In a different country I had a stent put in, spent the night in the ICU, and the total cost was $5000. And that's the cash, non-subsidized price. In a facility more modern than the average US hospital.
Re: (Score:2)
Our family deductible is something like $400/$600 - it's a trifle ambiguous because of how prescription drugs are covered. The family max out-of-pocket (the point after which everything is 100% covered) is $4000, I believe.
Of course we live in Washington state, which is a bit more worker-friendly than some other locations.
Re: (Score:1)
Bleah. Obviously I should go do food service for google to get better health care.
Re: (Score:2)
Stop trying to unionize tech workers.
Did you fail to notice that the article we're discussing is about unionizing food service employees (not tech workers)?
Did you did not even read to the end of the headline??
Re: (Score:2)
"The workers are employed by Sodexo, which contracts service work for Google and other companies."
Not even Waymo, but Sodexo. The headline is trying to make the connection to "big tech".
Re: (Score:2)
"The workers are employed by Sodexo, which contracts service work for Google and other companies."
Not even Waymo, but Sodexo. The headline is trying to make the connection to "big tech".
Not to mention that this is likely a single cafeteria, or at most two. From the summary:
Organizers say they have a majority of union cards signed from the roughly two dozen-person bargaining unit....
Roughly 24 people.
I'm not saying that they made the wrong choice — only time will tell — but they probably should have held out and tried to make the bargaining unit be all of Alphabet's Mountain View cafeteria workers. That would have given them a better bargaining position. With such a small bargaining unit, these employees are taking a pretty big risk, IMO. If unionization drives up Sodexo's costs enou
Re: (Score:2)
In this case, the fact they are Sodexo contractors might be a blessing. They are free to unionize and Google is free to select a new contractor for their food service at the next renewal. Having your own workers strike is one thing - striking contractors is completely different.
Re: (Score:2)
My new study shows union members make $1.3m more (Score:3)
Which would you rather have? 1.3 million or 60k?
I bring this up because on every Union adjacent thread somebody comes in here and says there's no point to unions because you have to pay dues. We now have studies that show that's bullshit in addition to just common sense.
Your dues pay for professional negotiators. You want that because you want someone well versed in contract law and negotiation because your boss is going to try to pull one over on you.
Tucker Carlson has a negotiator. He called it an agent instead of a union but he still got one. It's a guy telling you you don't need a professional negotiator hires a professional negotiator for himself you know something ain't right
Re: (Score:2)
Re: My new study shows union members make $1.3m mo (Score:2)
And curiously you haven't linked it. Union staff like to claim shit like this to get job security for themselves. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if you were part of union staff yourself. Interestingly, there doesn't appear to be any robust research to suggest that unions actually do you any favors at all.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/e... [forbes.com]
All we really have to go off of is what unions themselves have published or funded, which presents an obvious conflict of interest.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Probably the best review Forbes has had in years.
Re: My new study shows union members make $1.3m m (Score:2)
Yes, and a very valid one at that. rsilvergun is claiming 1.3 million increase over your lifetime. Do the math on what that would mean over a 40 year career. No union anywhere ever is going to give you that much of a pay increase. That's the kind of sales pitch a union will give you to get your money. Basically worse than a used car salesman.
Disagree with the piece I linked? Ok, explain why. While you're at it, here's another one that cites numerous high quality studies:
https://projectionsinc.com/uni... [projectionsinc.com]
Re: (Score:2)
That company literally has a page on their site with the title: "UNION PREVENTION STRATEGIES"
Re: My new study shows union members make $1.3m m (Score:2)
That's not an argument.
Re: (Score:2)
So I'm off to enjoy some of the 4 weeks annual leave I get. Have a nice weekend!
Re: My new study shows union members make $1.3m m (Score:2)
Bad faith how?
As for your lame attempt at bragging about your union benefits...well...let's just say that you shouldn't start a dick measuring contest with a micropenis.
Re: (Score:2)
Bad faith how?
...well...let's just say that you shouldn't start a dick measuring contest with a micropenis.
That is hilarious. You don't do irony, do you?
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, let's play your little game. My previous job that I just left, which is also non-union, paid $92k/year, and gave 6 weeks of paid vacation. No joke, I could take two weeks off every four months. If I had been there another two years it would have gone up to 7 weeks.
My current job, also non-union, is only 3 weeks, though increases to 4 after some time. But I guarantee you that I have better benefits than you do beyond that. For one, free health insurance, free vision insurance, and free dental insurance.
Re: (Score:2)
It is kind of funny though.
Re: My new study shows union members make $1.3m m (Score:2)
I made it pretty clear whether you comprehended it or not
Re: (Score:2)
Your employer pays you what you think you're worth, and you get the same holiday entitlements that every person in my country gets by right, so therefore unions are bad.
Oh no, hang on, I re-read your latest comment, and it turns out you get half the holidays I do.
Also, this little boast:
For one, free health insurance, free vision insurance, and free dental insurance. All of them top shelf coverage as well. To give you an idea, laser eye surgery also covered. No joke, my only payroll deductions are for taxes.
is hilarious, because like everyone else in the world I get all that stuff paid for out of my taxes which means my employers has no control over my healthcare.
Re: (Score:2)
They're not going to think very hard about the point you're making.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
1.3 million dollars over a 40 year career is an average of $32,500 per year -- but then, which union jobs expect somebody to stick around that long? If you think a union can sustainably extract that much value from an employer, you are as insane as all your other comments suggest.
Re: (Score:2)
It's 1.3 million lifetime earnings. It doesn't matter if you stick around you're just going to go to another Union shop. That's because it's lifetime earnings. The place you work isn't what matters what matters is that you work in a field that's unionized.
As for doing it sustainably we gave 50 trillion dollars to the top 1% in the last 40 years. Productivity has shot
Re: (Score:2)
what matters is that you work in a field that's unionized.
You were comparing people working in different fields and pretending that earnings differences are due entirely to union representation?
I think you're the one who is working backwards from your desired conclusion.
Re: My new study shows union members make $1.3m mo (Score:3)
The average worker works 2,000 hrs/yr, over a 40 year career, adding up to 80,000 hours/career.
If we believe your study, union membership adds $16.25/hr EVERY HOUR - that seems fantastical, and in no way seems relevant to the "roughly two dozen" cafeteria workers in this story currently making $24/hr.
The vast, vast majority of union jobs are for skilled workers (construction, teachers, telecom, gov't, etc) and not jobs where you are responsible for putting a scoop of mashed potatoes on a cafeteria tray
Re: (Score:2)
Look maybe you're a lot younger than me but when I was a kid we were supposed to be working 10 to 20 hours a week by now. Instead we work more hours than the japanese. Back in my day when people talked about those short work weeks due to increased productivity that wasn't science fiction pulled out of somebody's butt it was based on projections of where productivity was going to go. Those projections wer
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, it does. And if minimum wage had kept pace with productivity it would be $27 an hour right now.
What could that possibly have to do with the fantastical benefits you claim by merely being a union member?
Look maybe you're a lot younger than me but when I was a kid we were supposed to be working 10 to 20 hours a week by now. Instead we work more hours than the japanese. Back in my day when people talked about those short work weeks due to increased productivity that wasn't science fiction pulled out of somebody's butt it was based on projections of where productivity was going to go. Those projections were right but instead we all worked harder to see who could build the most yachts for the 1%
I've been walking this planet for well beyond a half-century, and I never, ever, heard anyone ever promise/suggest/wish we'd all be working 10 to 20 hours/week, and again, what does this have to do with the $1.3 Million in increased waged over a worker's career for being a union member?
What I don't understand is why you go out of your way to repeat talking points fed to you by people thousands of times more wealthy than you'll ever be. Especially when odds are good you're not doing all that well economically. Or if you are odds are good it won't last. Like everyone else posting here you're one recession away or one minor medical problem away from bankruptcy...
I have no earthly idea what you're talking about - my post regarded your number ($1.3M) and the idea that workers work
Re: My new study shows union members make $1.3m mo (Score:2)
So you think the average union worker pays $30/week in union dues? I'd like to see an a actual citation to support such a number - I honestly have no idea what union dues are, but I find it hard to believe that $100K/yr union workers pay $1,500 in annual union dues.
Re: (Score:2)
$1500/year seems within the norm for a $100k/year job. Various pages found by a DDG search for "average union dues" say 1-2% of salary, 2 hours per month, 1 hour per 2 weeks, and 1.3-1.5% of salary.
Employees dues can be cheaper because a union contract typically requires the employer to pay for the time that a union steward spends doing their union work -- that doesn't come out of the employees' nominal pay.
Re: (Score:3)
Perhaps you should stop and think for yourself if what you're posting is right. $26,000 per year is about 40% of the median household income. No one hates u
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't like it because I figured everyone here on slashdot had enough wear with all to use Google. Come on you're better than this.
Re: (Score:2)
And still, you spew all that garbage, rather than supply a link to the study YOU cited, what a piece of work.
This is how you do it - Example [googlethatforyou.com]
It appears to be a Cornell study that compared ALL men that work in unions versus those that do not.
There was (apparently) no effort made to compare like to like - they compared everyone that identifies as male, and segregated union workers from non-union workers.
This is like those studies that compare every working woman against every working man and determine that wom
Re: (Score:2)
There was (apparently) no effort made to compare like to like - they compared everyone that identifies as male, and segregated union workers from non-union workers.
Almost. According to NPR [npr.org]:
Inversely, people with college degrees who have been in a union for more than half their careers made less ($2.16 million) than those with college degrees who have never been in a union ($2.67 million), "likely because of the association of union membership and occupations worked," the study says.
rsilvergun sure isn't covering himself in glory here.
Re: (Score:2)
Inversely, people with college degrees who have been in a union for more than half their careers made less ($2.16 million) than those with college degrees who have never been in a union ($2.67 million), "likely because of the association of union membership and occupations worked," the study says.
rsilvergun sure isn't covering himself in glory here.
I suppose that's why rsilv never posted the link...
How much will the union cost them? (Score:2)
If $25/hour isn't enough to live, how much more will they need to make to make up for the cost of the union? Unions do not work for free. Especially when representing so few people.
Re: How much will the union cost them? (Score:2)
Sort of. After your income reaches a certain level, you're going to find that most employers won't pay all of your salary in cash, but a big portion will be in stock, and often there's a delay between when your shares vest, and when you can actually sell those shares. Nonetheless, you're on the hook for the taxes of the value of those shares the moment they vest, even though you really haven't received any income from them yet. That can, and at least in my case does, mean I have to pay the taxes on money I
Re: (Score:2)
Sort of. After your income reaches a certain level, you're going to find that most employers won't pay all of your salary in cash, but a big portion will be in stock, and often there's a delay between when your shares vest, and when you can actually sell those shares. Nonetheless, you're on the hook for the taxes of the value of those shares the moment they vest, even though you really haven't received any income from them yet.
Why would there be a delay between when the shares vest and when you can sell them? Most companies allow you to auto-sell the shares for cash at vesting time.
Also, when stocks vest, companies typically take those taxes out of the distribution, which means you get fewer shares. You *can* pay the taxes yourself and keep all of the shares, but that isn't the way most people set it up.
So what you're saying isn't consistent with my experiences from getting stock grants.
Re: How much will the union cost them? (Score:2)
Publicly traded companies work a lot different from private ones.
Re: How much will the union cost them? (Score:2)
What does your tax debt on vested stock options have to do with the plight of these cafeteria workers struggling to survive on $24/hr in Silicon Valley?
Re: How much will the union cost them? (Score:2)
That was only in response to one comment.
Re: (Score:2)
Define "live". There's living and living within your means.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone who brings up dues is doing so to lie to you. Unions work. Which is hardly a surprise, th
Re: (Score:3)
A lot less than the increased wages. There's a study that shows union membership adds 1.3 million dollars to your income over your lifetime. Most union dues are under $100 a month. Honestly most of them are in the 30 to $40 range.
Union dues are a percentage of your wages — typically about one to two percent. If you are paying $40 a month, you're likely only earning $2,000 per month, which isn't remotely a living wage in the Bay Area. The reason tech workers don't want to unionize is because, assuming it is based on total compensation, their wages would be more like $500 a month, and they are unlikely to gain that much through collective bargaining, realistically speaking.
But even if the absolute top end you're looking at about 60,000 over the course of your lifetime versus 1.3 million dollars. I don't think anyone will have any trouble doing that math
It might average out to $1.3 million, but does that fi
It depends on your union (Score:2)
But I still highballed it for just that reason. My figures assume $1,500 a year or $125 a month. Assuming you're one to two percent that's not half bad.
But the percentage is don't matter and you're just using them as a distraction and straw m
Re: (Score:2)
What I don't understand is, what's in it for you to constantly shit on unions? Do you own a business or you employ cheap labor? It's not going to be a very big one or you wouldn't be wasting your time here. Cheap labor is nice until there's nobody to patronize your business.
Oh, don't make me laugh. If I owned a big business, you can bet your a** I would never have heard of Slashdot, much less be on here. And I don't "constantly s**t on unions". I just think that they were a lot more relevant fifty years ago than they are now.
IMO, unions are largely an artifact of failed government. If the government were doing its job properly — enforcing reasonable wage standards, maximum work hours, safety standards, health insurance coverage, etc. — then unions would be larg
Re: How much will the union cost them? (Score:2)
If their current wages are truly "unlivable", why aren't the workers quitting or dying? I'm being facetious, but seriously, these workers have likely "suffered" with these unlivable wages, why? Because as bad as they claim it is, it is likely the best they could find.
I wonder what Waymo will do if Sodexo's "roughly two dozen" cafeteria workers get a significant raise? A $5/hr raise across 12 people comes out to $120K/yr - I suspect a competing food service company might come in, undercut the Sodexo contract
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently, if they have a single child, their "living wage" shoots up to $57/hour, anything less is, apparently, unlivable.
"Ironically"? (Score:2)
"Ironically, one of the workers said they were inspired by Hasan Piker, who NBC News describes as "a leftist Twitch streamer and political commentator" with large followings on Twitter — and on Google-owned YouTube."
How is that "ironic"? I mean, even with the wrong ways people use the term - where is there any irony at all?
Re: (Score:2)
How is that "ironic"? I mean, even with the wrong ways people use the term - where is there any irony at all?
It's the favored "valley girl" lingo of the sudo-intellectuals.
Who Knew? (Score:2)
The workers are employed by Sodexo, which contracts service work for Google and other companies. Organizers say they have a majority of union cards signed from the roughly two dozen-person bargaining unit....
Two dozen cafeteria workers? That what we're talking about?
Workers say the $24 an hour they make from the company is not enough to live adequately in the Bay Area.
Perhaps, maybe, cafeteria worker is a transitionary job, not a career? Must every job provide for every workers needs in any job market?
They also cite the prohibitive cost of the company's health plan, which has a $5,000 deductible.
That's comparable to the federal government's "affordable" health care planes.
The living wage in the San Jose-Sunnyvale area is $27.74 for a single adult, and $52.74 for a single adult with a child, according to MIT's living wage calculator....
That makes no sense, why does having a child increase your cost of living by $50K/yr? Are these dozen or so cafeteria workers saying (with a straight face) that they deserve six-figure salaries to serve Waymo employees lunch (and breakfast
What is the leverage? (Score:1)
If that was my company I would not worry, they can unionize all they like, I would *lower* their pay to the minimum that anyone of them makes and if they decided to strike I wouldn't worry, just outsource the food preparation to local restaurants. What sort of leverage do they think they would have, seriously? I wouldn't care if they went on a strike for a year, I would cover the food preparation in a different manner and wait for them all to quit and to dissolve that stupid union.
Re: (Score:2)
If that was my company I would not worry, they can unionize all they like, I would *lower* their pay to the minimum that anyone of them makes and if they decided to strike I wouldn't worry, just outsource the food preparation to local restaurants. What sort of leverage do they think they would have, seriously? I wouldn't care if they went on a strike for a year, I would cover the food preparation in a different manner and wait for them all to quit and to dissolve that stupid union.
Maybe you missed the part where they already are outsourced. They work for Sodexo, a company that provides food services to other companies. Those companies pay a fixed cost to Sodexo. When a location unionizes, Sodexo presumably has to absorb the cost of their demands until contract renegotiation time, at which point either the company hiring them pays a higher cost or switches providers (in which case they all lose their jobs, and are probably unlikely to be considered for future employment with Sodexo
Re: (Score:2)
These workers work for Sodexo, not Waymo, and if the employees unionize and raise the cost of cafeteria service, Waymo may cancel the contract and hire another cafeteria service which may or may not retain the expensive union laborers.
Waymo is free to cancel the contract, and once cancelled, Sodexo can calim there's no more work and the union workers are out on the curb.
Legally.
Sustainabity (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When a company is 80% automated it makes sense that the 20% remaining workers would make more. Otherwise the benefit of automation is just going to the owners/shareholders.
The benefit of INVESTING in automation should fall to the business owners/shareholders. Why do workers deserve to benefit from the investment made by the owners/shareholders?
If owners/shareholders are the only people benefitting from automation than that's a huge problem.
No, it isn't. The benefits to society are typically lower prices, higher-quality products (imagine the price/design if an iPhone had to be assembled by hand manually).
We are not headed towards the days when people can work less while the machines do the work. Instead we will end up with 80% of society having no way to support themselves while the machines create profit for the wealthiest 10%.
Machines create profit/benefit their owners, not the people they displace, why would you expect otherwise?
All winimum wage (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently, it is beneath minimum wage earners to expect them to have room mates?
Is every minimum wage worker, capable of only the most trivial of tasks and thus paid the legally minimum hourly wage, supposed to be able to afford their own apartment? That doesn't seem right.