this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
1944 points (100.0% liked)

Work Reform

11321 readers
188 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I said higher education jobs tend to not be union jobs.

That's not the claim that's in dispute. The claim was that higher education people are more likely to be in unions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Aren't people with college educations more likely to end up in a union? One of the reasons some places don't want to hire "overqualified" people is because they're afraid of unionization.

No, people with higher education tend to end up in career paths that aren't commonly unionized, regulated yes. Unionized no.

You should read what you say or say less crazy shit.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Compared to people without higher educations, yes, they are more likely to end up in a union. Most career paths, whether they require a degree or not, are not unionized.

Why don't you call Nina Turner, she'll tell you I'm right and you're full of shit. Might be more polite about it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

What's not what you asked.

Aren't people with college educations more likely to end up in a union? One of the reasons some places don't want to hire "overqualified" people is because they're afraid of unionization.

The answer is no. You're now adding context and nuance that did not appear in your original question.

I have no reason to be tolerant of the intolerant or willfully ignorant like yourself, cry somewhere else or at least be quieter about it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

The answer is no.

Then provide literally any single source that actually says that.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'm not your teacher, you have three immense resources, use them. Show us that you can inform yourself instead of taking positions based on ignorance only to obstinately defend them with more ignorance.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'll take your inability to provide the information (which you claim is trivially easy to find) as further confirmation of my position.

It's hilarious for you to accuse me of "obstinate" or "ignorance." You've provided zero evidence of anything you've claimed and randomly choose to start fighting and insulting me for literally no reason except that I have an .ml in my username.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I've provided it several times at this point which you've actually admitted multiple times at this point, stop with the crybaby affectation.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I’ve provided it several times at this point

No you haven't. What you've done is provide random links that don't provide the relevant information and lied claiming that they do, repeatedly.

which you’ve actually admitted multiple times at this point

No, I definitely haven't. I've been abundantly clear, extremely consistently, that you're lying and that the links don't contain the relevant evidence.

stop with the crybaby affectation.

At no point have I exhibited a "crybaby affectation." What I've done is correctly called you out for being a liar and a troll, while you lob a bunch of random, baseless accusations out of completely unnecessary hostility provoked entirely by the fact that you have a grudge against my instance.