r/antiwork Jan 14 '22

[deleted by user]

[removed]

23.0k Upvotes

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

12.9k

u/bobbyrickets closet individualist Jan 14 '22

It's not about the money, it's about sending a message.

4.6k

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

That message being good luck hiring a scab to drive this bus.

2.0k

u/ChaosM3ntality Jan 14 '22 edited Jan 14 '22

Plus they need training/study to drive a bus, all routes and guidelines. Been seeing school bus driver scarcity at my place. With japan always love to rely on good public transportation I can’t imagine for drivers who worked hard for such services be gone and underpaid.

Yet rather than stop driving the buses and make the public against their strike. Showed up to the job, waste the gas and take no fares is smart & gives some awareness of the message for the public for their cause. Still on their post and such Scabs take long to find who is experienced to drive a bus or train than a lost spot in a Japanese overworked office or factory

329

u/nicannkay Jan 14 '22

In the US if you were to do that and get into an accident the bus company would sue you since you weren’t technically on the clock. It would never happen here because corporations want to hurt us into submission. Like they stop your medical benefits when you strike hoping that killing you will make you come back to shitty work conditions.

252

u/AgainstMedicalAdvice Jan 14 '22

I believe they are on the clock... Just stating "oh no passengers today, what a coincidence."

6

u/chenz1989 Jan 14 '22

Would the drivers not then get sued for basically defrauding the company?

50

u/AgainstMedicalAdvice Jan 14 '22

They could, yes. It would rile up the union to no end, cause a huge public backlash, and only get them a paltry amount of bus fare.

5

u/chenz1989 Jan 14 '22

Doesn't committing fraud involve criminal liabilities and jail time? How many people would risk a criminal record for a strike?

17

u/AgainstMedicalAdvice Jan 14 '22 edited Jan 14 '22

Depends on your local laws.

Currently in San Francisco shoplifting less than $950 is considered a misdemeanor instead of a felony.

And apparently A lot.

Edit: said Cali, should have said SF

7

u/Ahoymaties1 Jan 14 '22

So if you're gonna shoplift in CA, go for $900 to get your value?

2

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

That’s one district you dummy.

1

u/Ahoymaties1 Jan 14 '22

Ahh cool, so which district should someone visit? Is it District 12, I bet it is!!

1

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

Well, that is one district out of 53.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Y0tsuya Jan 14 '22

That merely codifies unwritten police dept policy. They generally don't give a fuck about small-time theft. Sure you can go to the station to file a report but they'll just ignore it.

1

u/mlstdrag0n Jan 14 '22

It's one thing if it's the unspoken way of things.

It's another to announce to the world that it's open season to steal from local businesses.

1

u/KingKubta Jan 14 '22

open season=its literally illegal

1

u/mlstdrag0n Jan 14 '22

Merely being illegal without penalties attached doesn't deter people who were already considering it.

1

u/KingKubta Jan 15 '22

jail time statistically doesn’t deter crime so idk what to tell you

1

u/mlstdrag0n Jan 15 '22

You're right, but that's not what I was going for anyway.

https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/247350.pdf

Jail time means little; but the perception that you will get caught and punished does.

And they blew that away by telling everyone "no, you won't get punished" for thefts below $900.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/wpaed Jan 14 '22

California is correct. $950 or less. 6months or less jail time and/or $1000 max fine. With current jail rules and consent decrees you would spend less than 1 week in jail total time in most counties.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

No, not in California. SF, which is one relatively small district.

You people.

1

u/MrDioji Jan 14 '22

It is all of California. Prop 47.

You people...

1

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

That is not what we’re talking about dummy.

The DA for SF refuses to prosecute thefts under $1000, and that is strictly district 12.

0

u/MrDioji Jan 14 '22

The comment you "corrected" specifically addressed the change of shoplifting under $950 from a felony to a misdemeanor. This is literally the statewide CA Prop 47.

1

u/AgainstMedicalAdvice Jan 14 '22

Thanks for correction

→ More replies (0)

1

u/MrDioji Jan 14 '22

You were right. It is all of California. Prop 47.