• gmalette@lemmy.caEnglish
    7 hours

    Is this “average” in the same way “On average Jeff Bezos and I are billionaires”? Are execs getting huge bonus and workers nothing, or actual workers getting a sizable payout?

  • 13igTyme@piefed.socialEnglish
    16 hours

    400k is nice and all, but imagine how many PlayStations you could buy if you didn’t have union dues.

  • Cursed_Fig@lemmy.worldEnglish
    18 hours

    Brilliant to have a strike with a set duration so that A) management knows your serious B) management can accurately determibe the potential cost of the strike C) if the strike does occur, you’ll have higher participation rates and D) if the strike does occur, it won’t drain the union’s coffers as it has in the past with the American UAW.

    Absolutely brilliant planning. IBEW ought to be taking notes!

    • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.netEnglish
      18 minutes

      The catch is that it took threatening a strike to get to this concession, and even after they were projected to lose (I think) more than a billion a day. This isn’t a free gift out of nowhere, but a hard fought victory for the union

    • freeman@feddit.orgEnglish
      15 hours

      Samsungs stakeholders cannot capitalize on the whole 8-fold growth, as a part of that goes to the workers who actually produce the goods. If you really want a catch, thats the only one I can think of.

  • pulsewidth@lemmy.worldEnglish
    17 hours

    Fantastic outcome. Great to see people striking when their concerns are not answered and unions coordinating.

  • rain_enjoyer@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    17 hours

    most of that (7% of profits out of 12%) in stock vested over 2 years, so samsung got themselves a breather here. it might be also that these shares are at peak valuation now

    • MagicShel@lemmy.zipEnglish
      13 hours

      Seems like a good thing. Aligning workers and shareholders seems reasonable. And it even seems vaguely lefty, with the workers having a bigger stake in the means of production and all. Valuation might go down, and if there is a global recession most of our 401ks will go down, too. I don’t see any disproportionate downside.

      • MountingSuspicion@reddthat.comEnglish
        11 hours

        Not sure if you’re being sarcastic, but owning stock in a company is nothing like owning the means of production and all this does is give the company a pretext of making employees work against their class interests. An employer might mention that a strike would decrease stock value and scare a worker into staying in poor working conditions despite a strike being better for them for gaining long term benefits. Also, bonuses are a bad form of compensation in general because they often are dependent on decisions outside of workers control and in this case come from AI demand. Now those workers feel as though increasing prices, increasing AI use, and decreasing the number of employees all leads to them personally benefiting. All of these are against the interests of their own class.

        • LePoisson@lemmy.worldEnglish
          32 minutes

          It’s better than not having stock though. Same with having bonuses.

          I get what you’re saying though and I’m not even gonna disagree. Just that it’d be good for people to have stock in the companies they work for. It definitely is not the same as owning the means of production.

        • MagicShel@lemmy.zipEnglish
          10 hours

          I said vaguely. I’m not a communist or Marxist and recognize the limits of my understanding.

          The difference between owning the means of production and sharing ownership with investors feels meaningful but not diametrically opposed. Without the investors, the workers would STILL have to weigh their ownership stake against working conditions and determine what is in their best interest.

          I agree that bonuses being outside the workers control makes them not great overall, however in this case the bonus isn’t cash, but a stake in the company which again ties the payment to future performance. Not in a way the workers can directly control, but there is always going to be friction between what workers deserve to be paid for their work and what customers are willing to pay for the product. Ordinarily that friction serves to make investors fabulously rich and the workers largely get exploited.

          Anyway, I said vaguely and I stand by it. If you want to go in depth on your views of capitalism and Marxism, I promise to read and likely be fascinated. But I think you read that with a lot more intent than I originally meant to impart. I probably should’ve just left that bit out, knowing Lemmy users.

          • MountingSuspicion@reddthat.comEnglish
            9 hours

            I was responding less to the lefty comment and more to the idea that aligning workers with shareholders is a good thing (“reasonable” per your comment). If you don’t subscribe to left-wing ideas, and sit more in the lib territory (non derogatory in this instance) of the spectrum, I can understand why we would disagree on that.

            Generic leftist drivel below:

            The profit motive is inherently exploitative of the working class. In my opinion, any attempts to align the working class with the profit motive is just a way for the owning class to dismantle class solidarity. Not to get too into theory, but this is where the idea of and disagreements regarding the petite bourgeois often come in. There is a concept of a managerial class who does not necessarily own the means of production, but profits based off of exploitation of the people beneath them. A lot of people consider this its own class, or at the very least class traitors, but what it really is is just working class people who the owning class has convinced to promote the interest of the owning class. If the owning class can divert a large enough portion of the working class into that sector then there is not much hope for change. You often hear about blue collar and white collar workers, but discussions of people who explicitly do not have to work don’t come up as frequently. You’re seeing more people talk about billionaires nowadays though, and if enough white collar workers realize that they are much closer to blue-collar workers than the billionaires I think we would be in a much better place.

  • call_me_xale@lemmy.zipEnglish
    18 hours

    per chip employee

    Er… Which one?

    edit: Ah, I see, it’s a weird way to say “per employee of the semiconductor division”