I don't really see what the benefit for Jimmy to stay in that situation is. If Jimmy is skilled, and the company thinks or acts like Jimmy is replaceable, then Jimmy is in a bad job. Jimmy should leave before Jimmy is mentally harmed.
I believe this to the extent that I think creating a union to protect people in that type of situation is a net negative, where the union acts to help keep people in that type of job, where the union acts like those people are replaceable parts, which ends up being to the benefit mainly of that type of employer: as those workers indeed become replaceable parts.
We should encourage those skilled workers to leave instead, by offering them something better.
> I don't really see what the benefit for Jimmy to stay in that situation is. If Jimmy is skilled, and the company thinks or acts like Jimmy is replaceable, then Jimmy is in a bad job. Jimmy should leave before Jimmy is mentally harmed.
You are assuming a perfectly rational actor. And with perfect information - we tend to suck up and endure a lot of shit if we just think it is "normal".
I believe this to the extent that I think creating a union to protect people in that type of situation is a net negative, where the union acts to help keep people in that type of job, where the union acts like those people are replaceable parts, which ends up being to the benefit mainly of that type of employer: as those workers indeed become replaceable parts.
We should encourage those skilled workers to leave instead, by offering them something better.