undefined | Better HN

0 pointsubercore3y ago0 comments

I think you have a very US-centric lens on unions. In the Nordic countries, for example, unions operate entirely differently. So you need to be clear where your points come from.

0 comments

BobbyJo3y ago

> So you need to be clear where your points come from

They were responding to a post specifically asking about Americans' feelings toward unions. That made it pretty clear to me where his points were coming from.

If they were responding from Finland I'd be a little confused why they were responding at all.

ubercoreOP3y ago

Because Finland is a great example of unions working for the benefit of employees? Why are we constrained to only discussing how (some, not all) unions are in the US?

jasode3y ago

>Why are we constrained to only discussing how (some, not all) unions are in the US?

In general, nobody is constrained to just discussing USA unions but the particular subthread[1] that you're in which was started by gp (Zeyka) was asking specifically about America. And that's probably because this thread's article is about American unions.

That's why your clarification (to poster wallawe) was perceived as redundant and out of place.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34028480

Jensson3y ago

Because in USA every union is a battle. There isn't much to talk about with respect to Scandinavian unions, if you don't want to be in one just don't be, if you want to be in one just join, it is much simpler, while in USA one side forces the other side to take the same route, so you can't choose union other votes for what union you are in etc.

ensignavenger3y ago

The above comment was clearly in response to another comment about how Americans feel about unions, thus it is obvious it was looking at American unions.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse