The final agreement of course won’t happen until membership takes a vote. That part is technically correct. But to position it as some kind of subterfuge? That’s badly biased interpretation by someone who wants the deal to fail and has an axe to grind against the administration.
Here’s some other reporting on this, which correctly points out that the details certainly aren’t public, that the deal could fall through if even one union votes against it, but that there most certainly is a tentative agreement out for the unions to vote on it. Saying there is no agreement is a dangerous lie.
This is tantamount to throwing a Molotov cocktail at police during a peaceful protest. It’s an instigation to fuck with the process simply for the sake of fucking with it.
Ramón Nogueras, psychologist: “We are going to the psychologist when what really what we need is to join a union” - Público
Sometimes people come to my consultation and they say, “I have an anxiety disorder.” And I answer: NO, what you have is a boss who is a son of a b----. What you have to have is reasonable hours and decent pay. You will see how you get over your anxiety.
Context: the OP says that yes, medication and therapy do help people, but often the material conditions of people’s lives (poverty, underemployment, lack of stable housing, etc.) are factors making life harder to deal with, so they also need to be addressed. Thread is here.
Good that the trend exists, but I hate the way they’re reporting on it. “This won’t solve all our problems” is an absurd critique- no one action has ever solved all problems with an issue- and a simple, widely supported intervention like this, which will help solve a large chunk of an issue should be welcomed.
Amazon must save a fortune having their workplace health and safety program and their disaster plans just be a piece of paper that says “get back to work” on it.
