Sheldan

joined 1 year ago
[–] Sheldan@lemmy.world 5 points 21 hours ago

I have had enough times in which this was not the case, so dispute the percentage. But this can be the case, yes.

[–] Sheldan@lemmy.world 32 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

I don't see the issue with recommending a generic instance, if your intend is to convert the generic user. It certainly is a better experience than saying 'ok, so choose what you like from this list of instances' and they don't even know the implications or what that means.

The overcomplication of Lemmy is an issue, and this behavior tries to avoid that.

[–] Sheldan@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

Bin auch dieser Meinung.

[–] Sheldan@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago
[–] Sheldan@lemmy.world 26 points 3 weeks ago

It can be free, but people creating a distro can ask for money. Mostly it's free tho, and you probably can enter a custom amount of 0.

[–] Sheldan@lemmy.world 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Yes, because the union contract defines the absolute minimum of the rate, and union members can also earn more.

This will be my last response, it's frustrating, these are basic principles of how these contracts work and I'm tired of explaining it.

[–] Sheldan@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

The contract negotiated by the unions just defines the minimum, union members can earn more.

[–] Sheldan@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago

That's just personal negotiation then. And nothing that this top level comment was talking about.

[–] Sheldan@lemmy.world 0 points 4 weeks ago (5 children)

You are saying it's union members vs non union members being separated.

And it's not.

[–] Sheldan@lemmy.world 1 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (7 children)

The people the contract is with, maybe all employees of the company have the agreement.

You are thinking way too much into that statement, the way I described is the way it works here, and that seems much more likely tbh.

[–] Sheldan@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (9 children)

I don't read it like that. The sentence just says that their pay rate has that amount, not that it is connected to them not being a union member.

[–] Sheldan@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (13 children)

I don't think it's preferential pay. It's just that they pay more, somebody in the union also can get more money than the union minimum. Somebody not part of the union can get less or more than somebody in the union, just not below the union minimum.

It's not that if they join the union that they get less money. The union + 0.5 just means that they earn better than the minimum and the employer gives them more than the minimum, because people like that.

At least that's how it works where I live and union contracts are common.

Not everyone part of the union has to get exactly the union minimum, it's just that you cannot legally get less. People might not be part of the union but they still fall under the union contract negotiated by the union, because it applies to the entire company.

view more: next ›