this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2023
62 points (93.1% liked)

unions

1648 readers
38 users here now

a community focused on union news, info, discussion, etc

Friends:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I work a relatively safe, but still potentially dangerous, job as a zipline guide making $10/hr. All of the guides here take our jobs very seriously, and I'd even venture to say it's a pretty specialized position, requiring us to have pretty decent knowledge of climbing equipment and monitor weather conditions (wind direction, temperature, and rain all affect the zipline in different ways.) consistently to keep all customers safe. As great of a job as it is, I still think that $10/hr is a bit low no? Of course pay isn't the only reason I'm considering it. Our whole zipline course was built out of wood some 10 years ago, and most of it was never weatherproofed. Meaning that most of the course is made from old and near-rotted wood in some spots. It's not uncommon for us to have to go out and replace a board or two because they're rotted through. This is really my biggest concern. The entire course was built by an external contractor, so we don't really get regular inspections (at least not regular enough) since technically the company had nothing to do with its construction, and all course repairs have to be done by either us or our manager. Were we to unionize, we could demand to have the course professionally inspected and repaired, and a pay raise would be nice as well, but I've been doing some reading on the potential dangers of unionization to the business overall. Like in the case of Buzzfeed, (yes I know journalism is a lot different from ziplining) where workers fighting for unionization actually contribute to the overall downfall of the company since workers demand things that are in their best interests despite what the business' best interests may be. I'm not entirely sure if the two situations are comparable, but that's why I'm asking here.

top 5 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] lemmydripzdotz123@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Safety inspections are also in the customer's best interest. So is retaining the employees who know how to keep them safe when flying at high speed and well off the ground. If a pay raise is what is required to retain those employees, then it is critical to customer safety. Not having preventable deaths or injuries is very much in the best interest of the company.

If they have been alerted to safety issues and take no action or insubstantial action, that sound like negligence which can be quite costly.

IANAL, YMMV, etc.

[–] Chetzemoka@startrek.website 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The situations are always comparable. I'm a nurse in the process of unionizing at my hospital and I'll say to you the same thing I've said to some of my colleagues who voiced concerns about potentially losing our jobs:

If providing adequate pay and safety regulations is enough to push that employer out of business, do you really want that job anyway?

Might as well try to fix things and see how it shakes out. Because if you can't force them to fix these problems, then that's not a good job anyway. And if you force them out of business, it sounds like you're doing the public a favor.

(And for the record, $10/hour is shamefully low anywhere in the US for that kind of work. You have people's life in your hands! As a member of the public, I would expect you to be paid significantly more than that.)

[–] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 year ago

Yes. Note that I only read as far as "$10/hr".

[–] idiomaddict@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

If something were to happen to a coworker or customer because of negligence, it would absolutely be the company’s fault. However, I personally would use avoidance of that potential guilt to motivate me to unionize.