Workers in Sweden Will Expand Strike Against Tesla
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
Someone on r/sweden fact checked their statement and claims Tesla is worse on almost all comparison points including salary.
What Tesla does is just plain stupid, only to make a point about opossing unions...
3. Call-out
Call-out means work for which the employee is called back after regular working
hours and after having left the workplace.
3.1. At least one hour’s salary and a call-out pay shall be paid as follows:
a) If the employee was called after regular working hours or on the employ-
ee’s day off but before 9.00 pm, the call-out pay is equivalent to 2 hours’
salary.
b) If the employee was called between 9:00 pm and 6:00 am, the call-out
pay is equivalent to 3 hours’ salary.
3.2. If the work in case b) above represents daily overtime, the overtime com-
pensation for call-out work done as overtime work is immediately 100%.
They could be trying to force me to sign a contract that simply says I'll operate however I want to and if I believed they were an opposing force and not a partner I wouldn't sign it until I was force to sign it.
Once the sympathy strikes got going, McDonalds folded pretty quickly and decided to start following the hotel and restaurant agreement in 1989.
This is why McDonalds workers in Denmark are paid $22 per hour.
What they are trying to hide is the argument that a CBA will give power to employees during major reorgs with layoffs, a CBA doesn't set an upper bound to what employers can offer as benefits, just a lower one.
Now I didn’t work for Tesla, so the deals might work out differently here, but my point is that your comment is double hearsay, and that unions have every incentive to lie – at the very least by omission.
* Ports will refuse to load Tesla cars
* Post and package delivery denied
* No office/factory cleaning
* Electricians won’t do work on office/factory/superchargers
Pretty much all unions are left leaning politically, exclude members if you are connected to the wrong political party (Sweden Democrats) and don't offer many benefits for at least programmers.
The workers don't want to strike obviously because they are satisfied with the contracts and have better terms and pay than in their previous jobs for the same age group according to themselves. It's illegal for employers to punish people for participating in unions in Sweden so anyone could go on strike without getting punished for it.
Unions have outplayed their role in society for the most part. The jobs in Sweden that really need unions rarely have them (service jobs).
The unions doesn’t always try to get the most out of the companies in the short term but rather plays the long game and helps out in ensuring the company are healthy as well.
In times of economic trouble they can eg collectively negotiate solutions that minimize the amount of job cuts by temporarily worsen the policies for the employees.
The collective bargains applies to both members and non-members at the work place though.
Besides if you do vote for SD and don't tell anyone why would you want to pay someone that is actively work against your interests?
Famous example:
https://www-svt-se.translate.goog/nyheter/lokalt/norrbotten/...
There is no such thing as a "union-contract". What you meant is that there was a collective bargaining agreement in place at one employer which prevented them from paying you less than some minimum. That you then failed to negotiate a higher salary than the minimum is on you and not the union.
> Pretty much all unions are left leaning politically, exclude members > if you are connected to the wrong political party (Sweden Democrats) > and don't offer many benefits for at least programmers.
Nope. Unions have barred active members of Sweden Democrats from becoming functionaries, but have not terminated their memberships. For developers, unions still offer insurances and have pretty good lawyers which can negotiate agreements if there are disputes over, for example, IP, patents, or severance packages.
Whatever dude, you know what I meant. I am not talking about salary really, the problem is that the unions and the employers tried to convince me and others to accept a shittier contract (which we didn't do) but ultimately we finally got the choice to accept or get fired. Although at one of these jobs we got them to improve the terms since no one wanted to sign it and they couldn't fire everybody.
The unions don't work for the employees, they work for themselves only. They don't care about the employees which was very obvious both of the times when the companies I worked in got unionized.
> Nope. Unions have barred active members of Sweden Democrats from becoming functionaries, but have not terminated their memberships. For developers, unions still offer insurances and have pretty good lawyers which can negotiate agreements if there are disputes over, for example, IP, patents, or severance packages.
Again nitpicking (and you're wrong [1]) also since still being allowed to pay for a membership where you don't get anything to say because of your political affiliations is disgusting and just adding insult to injury. I don't want to be a member of such a disgusting organisation. If I get badly treated on a job I'd never stay and try to fight, I just leave for another job since there is plenty of jobs as a developer with most companies being really nice and most companies will give you good terms. If I really wanted to fight (over an IP or similar) I would never trust a shitty union to take care of it, I would just use my saved money (instead of wasting hundreds of SEK on a worthless union every month) and employ my own lawyer that _actually_ works for me and my interests.
As a dev there is absolutely no need to be part of a union. I have never been part of one and never will unless they radically change a lot. The idea of unions is good but the practice is horrible, mostly because they themselves has gotten so big and greedy they have forgotten where they came from and what their purpose was.
[1]: https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/norrbotten/dom-i-hovratten...
No, I didn't knew what you meant. There is no such thing as a "union contract" in Sweden. Your employment contract is between employee and employer and is only indirectly affected by the collective bargaining agreement between the union and the employer. That is, your employment contract may not specify lower salary or worse benefits than what the union and the employer agreed upon.
Due to inflation, collective bargaining rarely results in worse agreements than previously negotiated. But it can happen if the company faces bankruptcy and needs to urgently cut costs to survive. Apparently, this has happened to you more than once since you claim that "unions" and "employers" tried to convince you to accept a "shittier contract". Tough luck, I guess.
> Again nitpicking (and you're wrong [1]) also since still being allowed to pay for a membership where you don't get anything to say because of your political affiliations is disgusting and just adding insult to injury.
Well, the excluded member was an elected official of the Sweden Democrats. It wasn't solely due to his membership in that party that the union excluded him.
The Sweden Democrats counterpart Finns party can and do enlist in union elections just like anybody. Their success isn't great, but that may be explained e.g. by the party being quite anti-union? For example as we speak they are trying to push laws to restrict strikes and union representation.
Maybe there's similar dynamic in Sweden?
That unions and political parties founded by Nazis might have issues with each other have historical reasons.
If the local union chairman was thrown out just for being SD, that's fucked up.
Instead of having the government decide everything we let the employer organizations and the unions negotiate deals that are adapted to the needs of the sector they are in.
The employers and workers knows much better what is needed to make companies and workers flourish and giving them the freedom to negotiate without having the government meddling with it – that has been very beneficial to Sweden.
In this agreement it has been understood that employers respect the strikes of workers and doesn’t replace striking workers with other workers.
Now Tesla is actively trying to circumvent the strikes and that is pretty much unheard of here and threatens to set a precedent that threatens the entire model of the Swedish labor market.
That’s why there are these strong sympathy strikes now – as Tesla responded to the first strike by attacking the very foundation of our employer-worker relation here in Sweden.
So it’s more than just forcing unionization, it’s about forcing Tesla to respect the Swedish labor market and how we collectively bargain here.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taft%E2%80%93Hartley_Act
[2] https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/your-right...
In this specific example, if people like Elon can break the law without repercussions, it seems disingenuous to fault workers attempting to do the same (depending on where the actions fall between bending and breaking any specific law) to protect their rights, compensation, and working arrangements considering they're where they actual value comes from. Tesla is afraid of the precedent of labor having a role in their management and operations decisions (because Elon demands operating from a position of power against all), but they are fighting a losing battle (Sean Fein and the UAW in the US [1], incredibly high support of unions in the under 30 cohort in the US [2] [3] [4], etc).
> And among those on the frontlines are the nation's youngest workers leading the renewed push for labour unions. Gen Z is, according to the Center for American Progress, "the most pro-union generation alive today".
> "I think there's a growing understanding that if you have a job, you need a union," says Jaz Brisack. The now-26-year-old was one of the earliest leaders of union efforts at Starbucks in Buffalo, New York, in 2021.
[1] https://www.thestreet.com/electric-vehicles/uaw-president-sh...
[2] https://www.americanprogress.org/press/release-gen-z-is-the-...
[3] https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20230831-the-gen-zers-l...
[4] https://www.npr.org/2023/04/11/1169314853/union-rutgers-stri...
Apparently their sotesre even has "Strike" listed as a reason for non delivery, option N:
Edit: Yes! The terms also used are "sympathy boycotts", which this clearly is.
Strong unions working together are a small price to pay to keep the government from interfering.
I think the same nationality makes them pretty related.
It doesn't stop some unions from striking anyway, commonly called wildcat strikes.
The benefit of a union, is nobody will say otherwise ;)
I'm not running a business or anything, but if someone uses shady tactics like that against me, any negotiation is over on principle, regardless of the costs to both of us.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work-to-rule
aka Italian strike
The union wants regulation, that's the whole point. Tesla only have themselves to blame for any action that stems from the decision to not sign a collective agreement.
PS. 90% of Swedish labor is covered by collective agreements that has been hammered out over the last century - it is custom to sign it and no one has brought in scabs for almost a century during a strike, forcing unions to step up their game. As Tesla threatens the Swedish model, it is a concern for all labor.
Like i see a women is being robed, but since she is not my wife i can't intervene and only can observe.
And third party service workshops have also been included, so one of the best selling cars in Sweden right now will not be possible to service and neither possible to actually get shipped to Sweden.
However, because Tesla Sweden has repeatedly threatened repercussions (loss of company stock which is the main way Tesla Sweden matches market wages, loss of employment) if you strike, the picket lines are manned by other union members.
Tesla workers under IF Metall are under strike, there are scabs in any strike, Tesla was ferrying workers from other places to cross picket lines and do the work, that doesn't fly here in Sweden, hence the sympathy strikes by other unions to show Tesla that this attitude is despicable in this society.
The unions are allowed to strike because Tesla refuse to sign the collective agreement that regulates the use of strikes while the employees in return are guaranteed a minimum wage, pensions and so on - as have been custom in Sweden over the last century.
Tesla could sign this agreement any time they want to, but they're choosing this fight while the unions wants regulation. That's on them, not anyone else - and Musk is perfectly free to take his business elsewhere if he don't want to conform to Swedish customs.
More than 90% of labor is covered by collective agreements in Sweden, and while the number of members has dropped over the last few decades, about 70% of the population is still members of a union. When Tesla comes in, breaking all unwritten rules and customs and consequently attacking the Swedish model - this is bound to meet heavy resistance from the Swedish workforce.
Can you imagine the outrage that would come from a Swedish company coming to the US, trying to change fundamental mechanics of the system there without the support of its citizens? Why shouldn't this scenario result in the same outrage and resistance here in Sweden?
The solution is simple, sign the agreement - as is custom here in Sweden. If they can't conform to Swedish customs then they are perfectly free to leave.
PS. I explained why it's legal and why other unions feel obligated to join in, but you have not provided any arguments to why it should be illegal. Please explain Russell's teapot in this context.
I do like people arguing that other companies are better for workers. Perfect! Work there instead. No joke--I've done that.
Edit: I do want a Tesla, my workplace will buy me a car (as a perk) at a hefty discount, but if they leave I’ll get a Ford Mustang Mach-E :) no loss for us if Elon throws toys out the pram for ~130 employees
"Wanting" to leave has nothing to do with it. When the spreadsheet says, "Leave", then they leave.
As for a "living wage", I am certain that amount is significantly less than what Tesla is currently paying.
They need to sign the agreements so that they'll be bound by them even when Crazy CEO #2 has a bad quarter.