• Kache@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    Unfair how? It’s paid by employers, so kinda makes sense to me, i.e. employer caused the loss of livelihood, so they pay for the benefit to the recently unemployed.

    • Ilovethebomb
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      The employer is, presumably, willing to pay them to work, just not at the rate the workers want.

      • Fedizen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        So is firing people, for a boss. The thing is the vote is voluntary, the results are not. “voluntary” is not a good way to describe things like strikes because eventually there are disputes, they are “inevitable”.

        • Brkdncr@artemis.camp
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          No one was talking about getting or being fired. The boss wants them to work with the compensation they were offering.

          The workers decided they wanted different compensation.

          The workers are free to all stop working at once, but just like if you decide to quit, you’re normally not allowed to collect unemployment.

          Again, I’m for this. I think everyone that is working should have the minimum needed to survive at the very least, and it’s abhorrent that we don’t have that.

      • Matt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you earn more money on unemployment when striking than by actually working, there is a serious problem with how work is valued.