• queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Taft-Hartley gives the president the authority to intervene in strikes if they could present a national emergency. Thanks to privatization, UPS is vital enough that it might qualify.

    • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      While I am not disagreeing with you, were that to happen, it would be definitive proof of the need to nationalize the industry. If we’re so reliant on a private corporation that its poor labor practice can effect a national emergency, then that corporation needs to be nationalized for the good of national security. Now, would they? Definitively not.

      • CadeJohnson@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        It is entirely logical to nationalize package deliver! We should have an organization that follows regular routes all across America and delivers whatever packages, etc. people need! We could call it something like UPS; maybe USPS?!

        I get about as many deliveries by parcel post as by UPS. Nothing can stop the US Mail

        • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          <3 I love the USPS. Even with the DeJoy sabotage (why the fuck is that guy still in office?), they’re still the cheapest and most reliable carrier in my experience.

        • Trebach@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Even FedEx, UPS, etc will hand over packages to USPS if they think after a certain point it’s unprofitable for them to deliver to that address.

    • Altan1903@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I heard a similar thing happening with Asiana, pilots unable to go on strike, since they’re declared as essential industry. So instead they are doing a lazy strike. Refusing to accept small technical issues that are otherwise OK to dispatch with. Not giving voluntary extensions on their duty hours.
      Of course the government friendly media is riling up public opinion against them, how they’re causing losses with their difficult behaviour.
      But that’s just an awful argument to make. An essential industry, relying so much on safety, starts losing money the moment the employees start being a little less lenient.

      To be clear, we are talking about safe to fly airplanes. Almost everything on an airplane is redundant, and the manufacturers provide clear instructions what can be inoperative and under what conditions.
      Still, the captain can decide to spend a lot of time on this; do a very extended safety briefing before departure, delaying the flight. Requesting extra fuel over safety concerns. Requesting a different route, because let’s say the weather radar is not working and there’s a small chance of bad weather along the route.