politics

19148 readers

2046 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

227

The UAW strike brought back militancy and won what seemed “impossible” (www.motherjones.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Highlights: The United Auto Workers’ 46-day strike was meant to be a historic return, a path forward by embracing the union’s militant roots.

The name alone made that clear: UAW leaders called it “The Stand Up Strike,” a reference to the historic 1936 sit-down strike at a General Motors plant in Flint, Michigan, that helped create the modern labor movement. The goals were similarly bold this time.

For the first time in UAW history, the union was led by a president directly elected by members.

[UAW President] Fain used the rhetoric of class war more fluently and to greater effect than almost any public figure in recent memory. In August, a month before launching the strike, Fain threw a contract proposal from Stellantis, formerly Chrysler, into the trash. He wore a t-shirt that declared “Eat the Rich” and vowed to “wreck” the economy of the “billionaire class.”

Fain used an approach that flipped the normal order of things, allowing the union to play the part of the companies’ disciplinarian. For the first time, the union struck all of the Big Three automakers at once. Workers did not all walk out on the same day. Instead, the union adopted the “stand up” strategy under which the strike gradually expanded in response to what was happening at the bargaining table. If Stellantis behaved well, Fain would announce that the company was being spared. If it was recalcitrant, one of its most profitable plants would be taken offline. By the end, about 46,000 of the 146,000 UAW members at the Big Three were on strike.

In another break from tradition, Fain used livestreams to tell members in real time just how much progress was being made in the negotiations.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MySNsucks923 36 points 1 year ago

As someone who works for a union, seeing all the unions working for better benefits for its workers happening big over the last few years…. I’m looking forward to our next contract negotiations.