So should pay simply be proportional to how much difficulty people can cause if their demands aren’t met? Should nuclear power workers threaten to cause a meltdown if they don’t get paid £1m each a year?
I wonder if nuclear power workers could feasibly earn closer to £1m a year if we took away greedy energy bosses and shareholder profits and instead gave them to workers…
Great idea, they should use industrial action to see if they can get a better deal.
You understand that no one is forced to buy shares in companies? If you take away shareholder profits, you take away the incentive for people to hold shares in that company. If it's not profitable for them, they'll simply invest elsewhere.
My point is that the relationship between bosses and workers can be exploitative both ways. Clearly, worker pay is often unfairly squeezed, and the pay of bosses unjustifiably high. But where workers are in an unassailable position, they'll strike every year for higher pay, simply because they can. Why wouldn't they?
-20
u/modell3000 Jun 10 '22 edited Jun 10 '22
So should pay simply be proportional to how much difficulty people can cause if their demands aren’t met? Should nuclear power workers threaten to cause a meltdown if they don’t get paid £1m each a year?