I’m a member of a union that includes both office and field workers. It works well for all the big, common negotiations. We all want better wages, healthcare, retirement, hours, etc. But when it comes to working conditions, we have clear differences. The most recent example of “return to work” shines a light on this.

The field workers, understandably, don’t give a shit about “return to work”. Some even resent the office workers for having the ability to work from home. Meanwhile, some office workers will likely quit without the ability to work from home. My company has recently decided to completely remove the ability to work from home. In response, the union is completely split on how to react.

How should I approach the internal discussions? I’m hesitant to advocate for pushback because not everyone will benefit. On the other hand, no resistance at all feels like a concession of worker’s rights.

TLDR: Work from home taken away. Should a union pushback?

  • relay@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I suspect the reason that white collar workers get paid more than blue collar workers is because the owners of the company see and interact with them regularly and it is harder for bosses to see them just as a number on a spreadsheet.

    That’s my two cents anyways. As a white collar worker that doesn’t do much considering how much he’s paid, I don’t mind if blue collar workers get paid a little more. I think it would be cool to demand higher wages for blue collar workers and more work from home days for white collar workers.

    • Fibby@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wages are very much based off industry standards. The company is non-profit and the “owners” are elected, so its not as clear cut as that.

      I provided a little more context in my other comment.