this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2024
210 points (98.2% liked)

politics

19090 readers
3975 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
all 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 89 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Whenever you meet somebody who tells you that they're against unions, join in with them. But focus on police unions only, go hard on their monopolization of violence. Be all in on Unions going away, because it would mean police would no longer have qualified immunity.

Watch their faces.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago

Unions aren't the ones that are making qualified immunity a thing. It certainly helps their recruiting.

It's the courts and, to a greater extent, the cities that hire them, that have allowed it to go on.

[–] [email protected] 83 points 2 months ago (6 children)

Today I learned that 23% of the country have an IQ of that: 23

This totally brings to mind the anti labor and Union poster I saw for an airline where they said with your union dues within a couple of months you'll be able to buy that PS5.

I'm like: motherfucker, I can buy that PS5 immediately and have money left over IN ONE PAYCHECK because I'm in a union.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago

I wonder why the figure is about union disapproval, seems strange to me.

"Thank you for participating in the survey! In your opinion, do you disapprove of unions that tend to do nothing but steal wages from hard-working American families' pockets?"

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago

I work for a unionized airline and a lot of people bitch and moan that we have to pay dues roughly equal to 2% of our income. I always remind people that our non-unionized competitor pays their employees a flat 10% less than we get paid. So we make more, get union protection, and a ton of other benefits by being unionized. I have no problem paying union dues.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago

I get anti-union propaganda in the mail. I've only gotten things a couple times, but I've always made sure to give them a call and let them know why I never want them to send anything to me ever again.

So gross.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

My employer is negotiating with one of the unions right now, and they keep sending everyone email updates on the negotiations that very clearly are trying to get those of us that aren’t in a bargaining unit to feel annoyed at the union for asking for more in raises than the rest of us got. It’s having the opposite effect - it’s making us feel like upper management aren’t negotiating in good faith, and making me wish my position was eligible to be in the union

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

23 and me saw an opening in the market

[–] [email protected] 41 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Being anti-union is the best asshole test.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago

With very few exceptions. The police union in Chicago is a goddamn monster that needs to be broken up.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I wish articles wouldn't use double negatives like this.

Is "approval" at a 57 year low, or is "disapproval" low? Meaning, if disapproval is low, does that mean more people approve now?

I did read the article, by the way. I just feel like the wording could be better. I'm glad to see approval is so high. I wish access to unions was better.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago

I think approval and disapproval ratings are two different things that do not necessarily correlate.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago

Neutral and ambivalent opinions also exist.

Saying "disapproval rate at all time low" paints a more complete picture than "approval or neutral opinion at all time high."

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

does that mean more people approve now?

No. If you read the article, you'll find that approval is slightly lower than in 2022.

Likewise, when polls report "Trump disapproval at all time high" it does not necessarily mean "Trump approval at all time low".

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I literally said I read the article. It's in my post. Maybe if you read my post instead of the first sentence, you'd realize what I dislike is the use of double-negatives generally.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

You read the article but asked a question that is answered in the third paragraph.

70% of Americans said they approved of unions, per Gallup's most recent poll, conducted in August. That's just one point shy of the record hit in 2022

And "disapproval hits 57-year low" is not a double negative, for the same reason "homelessness hits 57-year low" is not a double negative.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago

Good! The reagan era brainwashed us to think unions are bad for employees and society. Unions are good for employees and society. They're only bad for greedy fatcats capturing untold wealth.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

So Labor Union support hits 57 year high? Just say that.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 2 months ago

Axios - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Axios:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.axios.com/2024/08/28/labor-union-disapproval-gallup-57-year-low?utm=axios_app
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support