Our labor laws are archaic, hence the need for unions. If the government had spent the past 50 years protecting workers instead of helping exploit therm, we probably wouldn't need unions.
this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Communism
1712 readers
4 users here now
Welcome to the communist Lemmy community! This is a community for all Marxist.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
This is good analysis, but begs the question why the government has not and does not protect workers to the extent that it could/should. Who has an interest in weak workplace protections for workers?
If the government is bad on worker's rights it is because it is a government run by and for capitalists. The state is consistently instrumentalised by the capitalist class to hamstring labour's bargaining power to suppress wages to increase profits.
Basically that is to say: these laws are not archaic, they are in fact working as intended, the intent is simply not to support working people, it is to secure and grow profits.
edit: I just realised where this was posted, so perhaps I underestimate your familiarity with these points, but I'll leave it up anyway in case of curious third parties
Fry is unintentional correct here. A new form of organizing outside of the legal concept of a "union" is desperately needed.