this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
249 points (99.2% liked)

Work Reform

9996 readers
131 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tjhart85@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

'Right to work' has to do with not being required to be in a Union in order to get a job (ie, you have a right to work at a location whether you're in the union or not).

Right to work is bullshit and definitely helped in gutting the unions, but, I'm not sure how that has to do with anything to do with gig workers at all.

[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

It doesn't; this guy is just unaware of what 'right to work' means (admittedly, it's a deliberately obtuse name), and seems to have no willingness to entertain the possibility that he might not know something.

[–] treefrog@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Right to work allows employment at will. Meaning you can be fired without cause.

My point is it doesn't apply to contractors and deactivating someone without cause is a breach of contract.

[–] tjhart85@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Do a quick Google search for "right to work vs at will employment" because you've got them mixed up.

Additionally, the gig folks don't have a contract that protects them and they're being classified as contractors when (it's being argued) they shouldn't be. That's literally the issue.