On: Seattle's Uber union law set to go into effect

[JumpCrisscross]

> a temporary solution to a much larger problem

There might be disageeement on how "temporary" this will be.

[valarauca1 → JumpCrisscross]

The temporary problem is a lack of respect and exploitation of workers in their employment.

The employer can correct this anytime they want. They refuse too and fuel employees will to unionize.

The problem is as temporary as the employer wishes for it to be. This is no different then any other management driven mistake.

Why is it okay our site crashes every 48 hours? Management won't allocate money to fix it.

Why are our workers striking for better pay? Management won't allocate money to fix it.

You may argue the money doesn't exist to fix that issue. Which is really just stating the company is going out of business at a rather slow rate...

[JumpCrisscross → valarauca1]

> a temporary solution...

>> the problem is as temporary as [Uber] wishes for it to be

My point was that the solution chosen, binding unionization voted on by a minority of drivers, is not temporary.

[valarauca1 → JumpCrisscross]

>The solution was chosen

So what other solution is there? Choice implies options. What are the other options?

Also you are attacking democratic rule by a minority of voters... Except that is the very legal system we have here in America. There are far more non-voters then voters. What right do their laws have to apply to us? This is your logic.

[jerf → valarauca1]

You seem to be reading everybody here very harshly and with no principle of charity, to the point that it's not ever clear to me you're actually reading them.

To be entirely clear, I am not making any claims about the desirability or lack thereof of unionization whatsoever. I'm just saying the thing I just said.