STOCKHOLM, Aug 13 (Reuters) - Swedish trade union IF Metall said on Thursday it was calling off its three-year-long industrial action against Tesla after the carmaker bought out all the union's striking members at the company. "This means that the co...
If I understand the Wikipedia article, the only source I could find that elaborates on this, correctly, the buy-out means that all striking workers were payed by Tesla to end their employment, i.e. at the end no striking union members were left at Tesla and thus
IF Metall has no longer the mandate to negotiate a collective agreementthe strike itself has no effect anymore:Edit: Updated using information from IF Metall.
Thanks, as I wrote above, that would usually not get the union off your neck, of course they can’t strike without union members employed. But they can still make blockades and demand the company makes an agreement with the union.
I’d hate if this means the unions lost the fight.
They cant demand an agreement if there are no members. (edit: yes they can, below)
This all started because they couldn’t get an agreement for their members.
yes they can, perfectly standard way for unions to operate, and has happened multiple times here.
For instance with McDonald’s and 7 Eleven.
The company is suffering blockade by union members (That don’t work there) until the company gives in.
Of course it did, but that is not the sole interest for the union, it is also an interest that the company doesn’t undermine other companies that actually have agreements with the union.
You still need to have someone represented at the company, by the union calling for the initial blockade.
In the McDonalds case, the people working AT McDonalds were in a union
No, and why do you think that? Sounds like you don’t really know how unions work in Scandinavia.
IDK if that is true, but it is irrelevant, because it was not a strike that determined the outcome, but blockade and boycott.
And there have been other cases, where both the owner and people employed were right wing idiots who were all against unions, they were forced to ultimately make an agreement anyway. They even had support from right wing parties, having arrangements there to support them.
So are you saying that no members of McDonalds were part of the union? The union had absolutely 0 members at McDonalds? I understand that in Scandinavia being part of a union is completely separate from the company, and any collective agreement, but you still need to be a member if I’m not mistaken.
In the case I’m seeing about another McDonalds blockade, cleaning contractors weren’t being treated well, which also resulted in a blockade. The union related to the cleaners called the blockade which brought in all sorts of other unrelated members.
You very clearly don’t understand the rules here. No you don’t have to be a member, Obviously the union isn’t part of the company, that would be weird and wrong. But in bigger companies, the unions have a right to have 2 members on the board. But you cannot force people to be members of a union, that is illegal. You can only force a company to follow the agreement between DA and LO, or you may negotiate your own terms as a company.
When you start a new company like McDonalds was at the time (early 80’s), they can easily ask the people they hire if they are members of a union, and then not hire them if they are.
IDK if any were, and it’s irrelevant except for the ability to receive compensation from the union in case of a strike.
I am not familiar with the second example, but it is absolutely the case that unions may step in and blockade a company that doesn’t follow the agreement set between the union of the companies (Employers) that in Denmark is called Dansk arbejdsgiverforening (DA) and the united worker unions called LO.
If these agreements aren’t met by any employer, unions may step in and make sanctions, boycotts and blockades, to get them to follow the rules, disregarding whether they have union members employed or not.
Okay I did some more digging for specifics on 0 representation, and came up with a case for 3F where it was legal. But I would be shocked if McDonalds actually had 0 representation at the time.
3F had 0 active members in the union at the location, but they still had a sympathy strike against them which was ruled legal. Only after they signed an agreement with a different union, did that sympathy strike become illegal.
I didn’t mean it that way. I know in North America, you aren’t a union member at the company unless the employees at the location vote to join the union. In Scandinavia, you can just join the union and it’s an employee by employee choice unrelated to the company.