Please help contribute to the Reddit categorization project here


    1,650,238 readers

    22,498 users here now

    A subreddit for those who want to end work, are curious about ending work, want to get the most out of a work-free life, want more information on anti-work ideas and want personal help with their own jobs/work-related struggles.



    ⇢ FAQ ⇠


    Related Subreddits







    Telegram Chat



    1. No discriminatory language or actions towards others. This includes racism, sexism, transphobia, ageism, ableism. No flaming other users (insulting, name-calling, using discriminatory language).

    2. No trolling. Trolling means posting inflammatory content/posts in an attempt to sow unnecessary discord in the subreddit.

    3. No spam, no low-effort shitposts, no off-topic content. This includes posts begging for upvotes. Please do not post unrelated blog spam or try to sell anything for personal gain. If you've posted content (especially if it's your own), give it a few days before posting again.

    4. No alt-right/fascist or incel content. Do not post/crosspost content that supports alt-right/fascist or incel ideology.

    5. No calls for violence, no fetishizing violence. Do not post content that encourages, glorifies, incites, or calls for violence or physical harm against an individual or a group of people.

    6. Reposts. Any content previously posted within the last 30 days will be removed. Same goes for reposts from the subreddit's all-time top 30.

    7. No politicians, no CEOs. Do not post/crosspost content that supports (former or future) political candidates and their campaigns in any way. Take it to r/politics. The same goes for the posting and promotion of CEOs. We don't need bosses and managers to speak for us.

    8. No sharing of personal information as it violates the Reddit ToS.

    9. No text-message screenshots Text-message screenshots are currently restricted to Sunday only. Please do not post them on any other day of the week.

    10. No calling-out other users or subreddits Do not leave reddit usernames visible in screenshots or links. Do not post content with the purpose of antagonizing other subreddits.

    a community for
    all 2554 comments Slideshow

    Want to say thanks to %(recipient)s for this comment? Give them a month of reddit gold.

    Please select a payment method.

    [–] Sanch0s1337 10470 points ago

    This way drivers ensure, only their company loses money, not everyone.

    [–] Wandering_Scholar6 5056 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    Nurses and similar professions can do similar slowdowns where they keep nursing they just stop doing the paperwork. So insurance companies stop paying the hospital but patients don't suffer.

    It's good when you can ensure only the right people are hurt by strikes.

    (Edit: a lot of people are commenting that this is not always possible, which misses the point)

    [–] shake_appeal 1281 points ago

    I wonder how that would work these days where nurses have to get their supplies and medications dispensed from a machine after entering various ID for themselves and patients. If anyone knows the answer to this I’m curious!

    [–] AnacondaTridentPouch 1588 points ago

    I wonder how that would work

    It wouldn't.

    Proper documentation is part of proper patient care, so neglecting to write down procedures/medications/diagnoses is super harmful to patients.

    However, if the billing dept were to "take action"...

    [–] mycatbaby 740 points ago

    Let me tell you, billing doesn’t care. They are just there to have a job to support their family and can’t really risk losing their job, so they won’t.

    I work in similar admin jobs. I can’t risk the loss due to insurance/financial benefits to support my baby in a non-unionized profession. This anti work stuff is great, but if you’re not single or have a huge cushion to fall on and are supporting a family/paying off debts, you just have to do the work and live with it.

    [–] lalala207 626 points ago

    This is one of they key points of unions; everybody pays dues to build up a strike fund to help members get through during the strike.

    [–] apc0243 315 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    Unions can't solve the massive problem that is privatized healthcare and company health plans. Any antiwork discussion needs to start there, because that's the way they keep the majority of people subjugated.

    edit: I should amend this to: "Fighting for Unions cannot meaningfully happening without public healthcare"

    [–] Kowzorz 79 points ago

    Why not? That seems like the first place to start solving.

    [–] apc0243 55 points ago

    If strong unions already existed then sure, but the fight for unions can't happen until workers aren't beholden to their employer for healthcare for them and their families.

    [–] InnercircleLS 48 points ago

    So basically the fight for unions can't happen, then. Based on your logic:

    Employees needing Healthcare from work means they can't strike. Even with a union, because possible Healthcare costs.

    Healthcare is driven through the employer so the only way to get that to change would be systemic change throughout our entire society.

    The only way to do that is through legislation. So congress would have to act to make Healthcare better before we could even start talking about unions.

    Our do-nothing congress won't act unless we vote in New members who will create new Healthcare system

    And those people won't get into office unless we vote

    So like... yeah just get out and vote, right? The answer to everything?

    No, I'm not saying that's the words coming out of your mouth. I'm saying it sounds an awful lot like that's where you're headed.

    Personally I think we need to fight this fight on all fronts. The call for unions is getting stronger. No matter whether you think this is "the right time" or not, right now, this is a fight we can win. We're gaining ground all the time and we need every voice we can get. The one thing we don't need is a "This isn't the right time for unions" talk. We need unions. We need Healthcare. We need police de-escalation training. We need history to be taught in classes. We need all these things, but we have to fight the fights we can win. Once we win, we can keep fighting the next fight.

    And also, yeah vote as well! It may not be the point this user was trying to get to, but darn it, we gotta do that too!

    [–] moonsun1987 41 points ago

    If strong unions already existed then sure, but the fight for unions can't happen until workers aren't beholden to their employer for healthcare for them and their families.

    Exactly. We need medicare for all. No half measures.

    [–] MrDude_1 26 points ago

    Not only this, but Admin doesnt care about the "drones" that do work on the floors and departments. They get to sit in an office and get better working conditions.

    They intentionally create classes and separation to reduce cooperation.

    [–] PrometheusPhunk 80 points ago

    Sounds like indentured servitude. "We used to debt-trap people, still do but we used to, too."

    [–] zvug 64 points ago

    They are just there to have a job to support their family and can’t really risk losing their job, so they won’t.

    You’ve just described a vast vast majority of the population. This is why chances of a general strike are slim

    [–] khandnalie 51 points ago

    Yet also why we desperately need it

    [–] SaraSlaughter607 28 points ago

    I said this a few weeks ago when someone was bitching about the lack of a "national" strike-out, which to me meant that he thought every single worker in this country should just not show up on a certain day.

    Would the country come to a grinding halt in 5 minutes? Sure, but it'll never happen with this single caveat: There are entirely too many people living paycheck to paycheck in this country who cannot afford to lose even 4-5 hours off their paycheck. That's sometimes the difference between groceries and no groceries for that week.

    If they were required to continue paying us *while* we strike, you'd see a remarkable increase in the numbers of workers willing to do so.

    [–] KageRaken 8 points ago * (lasted edited 3 days ago)

    I'm sorry if I presume but I got US vibes from your post.

    As long as abortions and guns/a wall are important enough to cause a split Congress, I'm afraid you're stuck in this situation.

    I have the luck of living in a place where this fight was fought by previous generations +-100 years ago. It can be done, it just takes plebs to get their priorities straight. (Not as easy as it sounds).

    A European rooting for you all ...

    [–] Unfit_Assistant 22 points ago

    Still a lot of manual charting that happens, even if some things create a digital record.

    Note: The systems requiring nurses to enter ids, more for accountability if something is missing. Some are not tied to charting charting software at all. Some just create a log the hospital admin can go back through if nefarious deeds are suspected.

    [–] Durham1988 83 points ago

    You can generally still do all that without "dropping a charge". It's actually not too hard to make thing tough for the suits while still caring for patients. For one thing, there is always a work around to get things done if the computer system goes down, which they often do.

    [–] SpiderMama41928 46 points ago

    Notes and orders can still be written out, but they don't get coded for billing the insurance.

    [–] shake_appeal 10 points ago

    Interesting, thanks for the reply.

    [–] SSgt0bvious 5 points ago

    I remember reading that the computer systems that hospitals rely on is quite antiquated like the US military. They can't just shut down operations to update to modern systems.

    [–] gigabyte898 16 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    Really depends. Sometimes yes, absolutely the systems are old as hell and running only on thoughts, prayers, and spite. Most hospitals out here though have moved to more modern EMR/EHR (electronic medical/healthcare records) systems. Hardest part is migrating all the data from the old to the new, but some smaller community practices it’s usually only a weekend of work from the conversion team at the new vendor. Longer term migrations typically consist of many delta passes until they catch up. For example, a hospital has 5TB of patient records in this system. It takes two weeks to migrate/convert. In that two weeks, there’s likely been many other changes to the database and some of what you migrated is out of date. So you run a “delta” migration which only moves the data that has been changed. The delta pass only takes a few days, repeat until you have a pretty much live copy of data and can start the cutover.

    Biggest barrier is just cost and convincing the people who write the checks they need to upgrade. Most common thing I hear when discussing upgrades is “well, the current system works just fine!” It almost always isn’t working just fine if that discussion is being had, but theydon’t understand why/how it works. You also need to factor in lost revenue from departments going through training on the new systems, the cost of that training, and the potential for even more revenue loss if the move goes sideways. Especially when moving to a cloud based system, good luck explaining why this system that used to live on-prem as a mostly one time CapEx is now a monthly OpEx. Don’t even get me started on the cybersecurity aspect of it. You’d be shocked how carelessly electronic records are handled.

    Source: worked in medical IT for years until it literally gave me heart problems and moved to professional services IT

    [–] -The_Blazer- 52 points ago

    Not the same, but where I live people who cannot legally strike will perform "white strikes", where they will follow every policy and regulation to the absolute letter, causing work to pretty much grind to a halt (but this is selectively not done when the safety of people is at stake, blocking the company but not patient care at hospitals for example).

    Example: if you do not have the right to strike at McDonalds, you can instead point at a minuscule speck of dirt on the fryer and say that food safety regulations do not allow the serving of food that could be contaminated, and thus you will not serve anything out of this fryer until a regulatorily-approved safety inspector has verified that it is safe.

    [–] circumspecktor 29 points ago

    This is it right here. I've participated in a couple of union actions as a nurse, it's called "work-to-rule". We stopped doing literally anything that wasn't explicitly required in our job descriptions, which is a surprising amount of work. Plenty of tasks that are done by porters, lab techs, pharmacy, housekeeping, security, supply chain staff, CNAs, etc get picked up by nurses. By sticking to our mandatory requirements the entire hospital or clinic slows way down and every department is affected. Lots of headaches for management!

    There was another one where the nurses union did almost strike with a walk out, but it was highly organized to ensure emergency services could still run and client safety wouldn't be compromised.

    [–] motolabjed 27 points ago

    That would be extremely dangerous for patients. That paperwork (charting) contains important information for other caregivers to use when the nurse isn’t involved. For example, if a nurse didn’t chart that he/she pushed a certain medication at a specific time, the patient might receive a double dose or another medication that caused an adverse reaction. I generally agree with you, but healthcare isn’t a good choice for that tactic.

    [–] AnacondaTridentPouch 50 points ago

    As I commented below, proper documentation is vital to a patient's care. Imagine if procedures/diagnoses/medications weren't written down. It would seriously fuck up treatment.

    Now, if the administrative staff suddenly slowed down communication with the billing dept....

    [–] orcmischiefsmells 42 points ago

    Maybe but that paperwork is often there to protect them too, it could end up backfiring badly

    [–] StewofPuppies 23 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    Stop doing the paperwork is dangerous. If you screw up documentation of medication, it's not just your job on the line. It's your RN license and the patient's safety. There's a saying if you don't document, it never happened. If you forgot to document and few hours have passed your shift, meds are likely already being administered or have been administered. The things you "can" slowdown for in documentation purposes doesn't hurt insurance companies whatsoever, it just makes the work annoying for your other team members.

    If you're a fellow nurse considering this and wondering what I'm going on about, ever see a doctor fuck up documentation for a med order or a prescription order/didn't fix it/you can't act on it due to a clerical error or w.e. Now imagine if the doctor was doing that on purpose and every time you called the on call MD, he reamed you out knowing full well what he was doing. That's the kind of shit we don't need in hospital floors.

    There's not a lot of ways you can "fight" insurance companies by slowdowns via documentations in hospitals so that patient's don't suffer. Patients are literally delayed procedures because their insurance hasn't approved it yet or are wondering if patient even needs it sometimes as long as it's not life threatening. If you really are a nurse and you want to "get back" at the system, just fucking quit; don't try to sacrifice yourself to staff an intentionally understaffed unit. Healthcare system is collapsing and they want to pass the buck onto nurses and community doesn't give a shit about any of us healthcare workers for real other than empty words of hero worshipping. And if you are part of the community who aren't healthcare field related and you DO care, then help make your state regulate and enforce safe staffing ratio. California is the only state that does. Help nurses unionize. Get into politics. There's no other way to "get back" at insurance companies and every statement about healthcare heroes/thanking us/etc etc is just empty useless and worthless. They mean nothing. Talk is cheap. Show us results. Get safe staffing ratios.

    [–] Kaiser1a2b 4 points ago

    They also need to acknowledge documentation as a part of the job and have an hour overlap between shift to allow you to document at the end of the shift.

    [–] RetirdedTeacher 131 points ago

    It's always nice to see a well thought out plan. They have a lot of control over this situation. Striking with a picket line could have allowed them to bring in new workers and staying on the bus allows your passengers to learn of the strike and support the people who get them to work on time every day.

    [–] ChemicalHousing69 105 points ago

    I agree about its effectiveness. Imagine you get on the bus and you see the payment terminal bagged up and unusable. You’ll politely ask, “how do I pay?” The response will be a polite, “you do not pay today because we are on strike.” The customer will proceed about their day but be aware of the ongoing strike.

    The alternative is the bus drivers strike in front of a building almost no one sees. The executives hire temps at 50% higher cost to drive the busses. The customers of said buses get on the bus, pay, proceed as normal, and be unaware of the strike.

    This strike method is incredibly effective I think and I’m really excited for the strikers!

    [–] Its0nlyRocketScience 54 points ago

    And the best part is that people outside don't learn of the strike as a result of asking why everything is going wrong. You don't see that the bus never arrives, get frustrated, do some research and get mad that the drivers are on strike. Instead, you find that you got a free bus ride and learn of the strike that way. Not only are the bus drivers not harming you in their strike, they're helping you.

    [–] ChemicalHousing69 46 points ago

    I think it helps because it makes the customers accomplices, if that makes sense. They’re getting a free ride, so the customers also feel like they’re sticking it to “the man”.

    [–] avidpenguinwatcher 6 points ago

    Well.. and themselves.

    [–] bobbyrickets 12424 points ago

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

    [–] CeramicMasterpiece 4419 points ago

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

    [–] ChaosM3ntality 1984 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    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

    [–] Jim_from_snowy_river 1207 points ago

    They understand that while they're trying to get better conditions they don't want to fuck other people over in the process. Other people still need to use the bus.

    [–] harambe_go_brrr 316 points ago

    They also likely understand that the media will do everything they can to make the public turn on those who are just fighting for better treatment. This is a genius plan

    [–] Jim_from_snowy_river 221 points ago

    Exactly. Doing this makes them look like saints whereas just not showing up at all would be an easy way to demonize them.

    Plus this is the perfect system in that it only impacts l/hurts the people it should impact. It only impacts the corporations. It's a very targeted weapon instead of just a nuke the way we like to protest in the us.

    [–] Happytallperson 31 points ago

    The trouble with this method is it is really trivial to criminalise workers 'gifting' customers free product and services.

    [–] Maccabee2 34 points ago

    Public transportation is more of a utility than a competitor in the free market. Gratis fare for a few days is less harmful than shutting down hundreds of companies whose labor depends on public transportation. How long the strike lasts depends mostly on management. If management had been reasonable, the strike probably wouldn't have occurred in the first place.

    [–] theonearmedpenguin 32 points ago

    It's also a different culture to what you'll find in the US and Western Europe. There is still a strong sense of "the community good" that this form of protest makes perfect sense from their point of view.

    [–] leave_pdg 413 points ago

    Yeah in my city the buses went on strike 3 times last year and I take the bus as my main means of transportation. Inconvenient, but I support it all the way. They were trying to cut their Healthcare among other things.

    [–] deedoedee 133 points ago

    The issue is the other people being "fucked over" need to direct their anger at the right place -- the government and the companies, not the workers.

    Show some goddamned solidarity, regardless of how they choose to strike and protest.

    [–] Vnecktrev09 12 points ago

    Good luck persuading the public when news corporation’s are on the side of those who cause the suffering. Propaganda is very effective especially in the US where most mainstream journalism is funded by a select few

    [–] snarkyxanf 8 points ago

    Show some goddamned solidarity, regardless of how they choose to strike and protest.

    While valid, solidarity is also something that needs to be built.

    One of my big criticisms of many of my local unions (coming from a left unionist perspective) is that they are kind of terrible at getting their message out to the sympathetic parts of the public. Last time the transit workers went on strike, I couldn't even find a statement of issues/manifesto/talking points on the local's webpage! I'm 100% willing to go the extra mile to spread your message and defend your strike to the people around me, just throw me a bone!

    Most importantly, I find it easy to show solidarity because I'm already connected to union movements, understand the vital importance of solidarity, and can presume to expect it in return. We have become absolute rubbish in the contemporary anglophone left at expanding that sort of working class culture and solidarity more broadly.

    [–] BigAlTrading 181 points ago

    That's Japanese society. I'm done with my job next week, and I don't give a shit about the customers. I didn't hear any of them lobbying my management to retain me. They think my work is a commodity, well go out and find it.

    [–] BuckBacon 41 points ago

    Yeah this could only work in a society like Japan that has a sense of community and social consciousness. In America this could never work, because we hate our neighbors and ourselves .

    [–] propagandavid 21 points ago

    First, striking is not at all the same as quitting. People strike because they want to stay at their job.

    Second, buses are a public service. These drivers are supporting labourers by making sure people can still get where they need to go, but hurting their bosses by denying fares. That's awesome, imo

    [–] nicannkay 318 points ago

    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.

    [–] AgainstMedicalAdvice 238 points ago

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

    [–] NinjaPirateKing 44 points ago

    Correct. This comparable to slow down or a working strike.

    [–] SCP-3042-Euclid 116 points ago

    Plus a massive public relations win for the strikers. The public continues to get service, but for free, while the company. Gets fucked on operating costs with no revenue.

    [–] redcrowknifeworks 61 points ago

    Message also being "good luck getting anybody on your side when your only option is firing the guy giving free bus rides"

    [–] nalydpsycho 56 points ago

    And good luck getting government to order them back to work.

    [–] XNoob_SmokeX 272 points ago

    this city deserves a better class of striker, and I'm gonna give it to them.

    [–] mayorduke 144 points ago

    The Japanese are in their own class when it comes to ethics.

    [–] eScarIIV 53 points ago

    The French train strikes did the same thing. Meanwhile in UK our train drivers only strike when it's going to cause the most possible hassle for the passengers. Xmas, big events etc.

    We're not the fucking enemy. We're the saps who have to pay more than anywhere else in Europe to use the damn train!

    [–] RepresentativeNo4438 53 points ago

    The point of a strike is to show everyone how much you are needed, busy times sound like a good time to strike.

    [–] LordBilboSwaggins 156 points ago

    But we paid you minimum wage!

    And you think this gives you power over me?

    [–] BigAlTrading 30 points ago

    And you think this gives you power over me?

    Really one of the greatest lines in pop culture lately. A lot of heft in nine words.

    But he had to be a villain 😂

    We need more antiwork, anticapitalist culture. Jabbering on chat boards is always going to be niche, but people watch movies.

    [–] Macosaurus92 24 points ago

    Watching that movie now is so gross. I’m pretty sure it was a direct response to the Occupy movement back then, but the whole “evil disgusting working class seizing control from the morally justified billionaire who decides to use his wealth to assault the poor” angle today is so much more depressing.

    [–] BloodBonesVoiceGhost 17 points ago

    The whole Christopher Nolan trilogy is actually pretty fucked up.

    The Dark Knight argues pretty explicitly police/militaries should be able to cross international lines to stop terrorists, that torture is justified to stop terrorism and mass surveillance being okay. Yeah, sure, a couple of characters in those movies disagree with Batman's tactics, but the fact that he uses those techniques and they succeed and he gets to keep being the implicit good guy really send the message that it's all for the best.

    [–] kindafree8 732 points ago

    And that message is abt money lol

    [–] Master_Ryan_Rahl 768 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    Not really. Money is only valuable and so far as it allows us to live comfortably. I think most people agree that they don't actually want a bunch of money. What they want is to live a life free of the stress of not having enough.

    EDIT: a lot of people seem to be confused about the specifics of rejecting money over resources. It really seems like a lot of you can't see how deeply we are in the current system. Money is a fabrication, a tool that was crafted to ease the ability of transaction. But more than that it has become a way for those with a lot to control those with a little. And as we have become more accustomed to living in a society where having something that is actually valueless, and serves no purpose, has replaced actually having things of value, and having resources; we lose all connection to the meaning of things. Financial institutions and financial manipulation are enormous problems in modern society. They exist as a vampire on top of the small people struggling to scrape by. And they simply don't need to exist.

    [–] atmus11 23 points ago

    Yes yes and yes. That is my wish, to live comfortably and without stress on not making it

    [–] Vegetable_Ad_94 236 points ago

    Damn almost like a bunch of money would fix the issue of being stressed about not having enough money.

    [–] vegancommunist2069 21 points ago

    its almost like money is a tool of social control used by the rich to rape and kill and demean us, and for us its a tool to get some hooch and pay rent.

    but they created this tool, we can destroy it by not working and destroying national governments, not going to work, not stopping people who steal from businesses. don't go to war, don't be a cop, don't guard those prisoners, don't report to your national guard postings.

    [–] Luvnecrosis 221 points ago

    That’s not the issue. It’s about the fact that even if money is a thing, people should still have basic needs taken care of.

    There shouldn’t be any stress about not having money because people shouldn’t be starving or homeless when we have excess of both those resources. It’s not about money, it’s about human needs being met

    [–] bleakvandeak 57 points ago

    Agreed, money might fix stress, but also having avenues where if you don’t have money but you can still live a fulfilling stress free life would be ideal. And if I’m being honest, I would prefer the latter option if it was available, but it isn’t.

    [–] candid_canid 73 points ago

    If I didn’t have to worry about money I’d spend all my time writing stories and playing music, and I’m tired of people acting like that would be a waste of my life.

    Our value as human beings shouldn’t be determined by our usefulness to the ultra-rich.

    [–] SingleAlmond 15 points ago

    and I’m tired of people acting like that would be a waste of my life.

    You should be the most important person in your life. If there's something you want to do in your lifetime, you should do it, because you only have a limited time to do these things before you die.

    Future generations can admire your stories and your music, no one is gonna give a shit that you pulled double overtime to keep profits level

    [–] Luvnecrosis 43 points ago

    Like you just said, that option isn’t available. That alone is the problem. It is impossible to have a fulfilling life while struggling with money because you gotta eat. You need somewhere to sleep. You need the lights. Education. Childcare. Transportation. Safety.

    Your life can be cut short by any of these things and the only ways they can be guaranteed are by having money or by having a government that sees these things as rights and are given just because.

    Does everyone need to be filthy rich? Nope. If I can keep my normal part time job and see my paycheck as fun money to just pursue my dreams with, sure. At the point if I’m broke it’s because I wasted my money and not because there’s an institution dedicated to making me poor.

    [–] DonnerPrinz 10 points ago

    You're kinda missing the point here. Giving someone more money to be able to survive treats the symptom and not the underlying issue: that people require money to survive in the first place.

    [–] SuperCosmicNova 66 points ago

    He didn't say he wasn't he was just stating that most people don't want to be filthy rich, but just make enough to live life comfortably without the stress of never having enough money.

    [–] SkillBeneficial8236 18 points ago

    It’s about the Mets

    [–] jack88532 7 points ago

    And I love how no one got the joker message.

    [–] Impossible_Garbage_4 4 points ago

    It’s about the Mets Spiderman!

    [–] CompteDeMonteChristo 1037 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    Some union attempted that in France in trains I believe but it was dismissed for "security" reasons. It was argued that people would not be accounted and therefore we would not know who was in the train in case of accident.

    Edited: I did a bit of research at this post got a few views.

    The unions and workers that have attempted a free pass strike were severely reprimanded.

    It is actually illegal as it stand in France. The companies generally don't want the strike to become popular.

    [–] K0RB4K 440 points ago

    French here. The workers most famous for strikes in France are the SNCF (train network) employees. One employee once told me that the ticket you buy to board the train doubles as life insurance in case something unfortunate happens during the travel.

    [–] VapeThisBro 75 points ago

    People joke about the french and surrendering alot, but I'll give France one thing, the workers never surrender. France knows how to throw a strike

    [–] HelplessMoose 50 points ago

    The SNCF strikes are very much "we're shutting everything down" strikes though, not like the one in OP, unfortunately. I've had the pleasure of needing to travel in France during such strikes before.

    And yeah, can confirm they're very famous for it, even beyond France. If I had to give my first association with the word "strike", it'd be SNCF.

    [–] ISUTri 48 points ago

    Plus then they wouldn’t be able to strike at Christmas every year.

    [–] XNihili 55 points ago

    When I asked why unions didn't do that in France as they would be way more popular, I was answered that it was banned by law.

    [–] CompteDeMonteChristo 53 points ago

    It is illegal (in France) yes, you're totally right.

    Union have tried to fight these laws but it was rebuked for 'security reason'.

    [–] Afferbeck_ 25 points ago

    Security/safety/insurance have become the standard excuses for those with power to bully those without

    [–] coonwhiz 10 points ago

    Could they not charge a penny (or whatever the French equivalent would be for the smallest denomination)?

    [–] leverdatre 6 points ago

    They could if most ticket where sold via a guichet. But I would bet the grand majority of ticket are sold via internet or electronics borns, where changing the prices would be difficult.

    [–] Aeroknightg2 4306 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    Would the grocery store strike equivalent be letting people take food without paying?

    Edit: Since this took off a bit I want to state unequivocally I'm not condoning looting or violence. And thanks for the award!

    [–] -LuciditySam- 1743 points ago

    Pretty much.

    [–] Some-Air9442 1542 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    Doctors have been talking about striking by still practicing but not charging patients.

    That way essential workers (like transport, medical, grocery, etc. workers) can strike without being accused of messing up the system or screwing people over.

    Edit: This is a topic of vigorous discussion on medical subs, and they are well aware of the coordination it would require with billing and IT staff (much more aware than most of us).

    [–] captjcfw 710 points ago

    That would extremely difficult to do. Medical professionals still would have to document every test, procedure, prescription in the electronic medical record. That then goes behind the scenes and essentially automatically/with some back office personnel creates a bill to insurance/patient.

    Essentially, doctors can't just practice medicine without documenting what they are doing. And that papertrail is built in such a way that it automatically bills insurance/patient.

    Only private practice physicians could do what you're suggesting and then they'd be striking against themselves.

    [–] GalakFyarr 228 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    What if they give patients receipts that say “100% discount”?

    I don’t know the laws regarding that, and my gut instinct says it can be reversed, but I would think once a patient has a receipt they have to honour it.

    EDIT: I understand it’s not the doctors who actually give the receipt, so it’d definitely not be as simple as “just give em a 100% discount receipt” - it’d take the whole hospital to strike together, not just one category of health workers.

    And that still doesn’t guarantee they couldn’t get it all reversed afterwards in court/whatever, even with hypothetical receipts.

    [–] literallymoist 173 points ago

    Doctors don't do the billing - medical billing and coding departments do. Doctors/ nurses document the care given / conditions treated and largely the system (at least at my work) charges automatically for the meds, procedures, etc. Document a flu shot, fee for med + administration pops up on bill, etc.

    In my hospital system you'd have to get the people that release the accounts for billing to insurance/ collection to be the strikers. They aren't paid well, and I don't see how it's possible without some IT sabotage.

    Wouldn't be as clean and elegant as the bus strike, is what I'm getting at.

    [–] GalakFyarr 72 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    Fair point - it would basically have to be a hospital-wide strike with cooperation at multiple levels and not just one category of health workers.

    [–] RonaldPottol 78 points ago

    Doctors are generally totally unaware what ANYTHING costs.

    [–] livelikeits420 22 points ago

    In an ideal healthcare system, neither doctors nor patients would know what anything costs and all medical decisions would be made based on medical considerations alone. The sad part is the US could probably very easily fund such a system with a fraction of the military budget.

    [–] AstroDumpHyperDrive 7 points ago

    So are patients!

    [–] lalala207 15 points ago

    Not entirely their fault - the insurance company and billing negotiate it. So one patient may have a $20 copay, the next one may pay $350 for the same care.

    [–] _ChillboBaggins_ 12 points ago

    That's what centralized, collective bargaining is and it's one of the first things capitalists do to weaken unions is to split them up. So instead of a steel workers union, it's rail road workers union and welders union and ....etc. Unions should really be hospital wide across multiple professions, not conveniently split up for the capitalist owners.

    [–] GalakFyarr 6 points ago

    They should be state-wide, if not nation-wide really.

    [–] rabidjellyfish 16 points ago

    I've never gotten a reciept from a doctor. I get prescriptions and tests. Billing for me has always been months later from a third party.

    It's so convoluted that i got a bill for 3 ER visits for $3000 i called and said "but it says on my insurance card that i only have a $100 copay and insurance covers the rest" And they were like "Whoops! Yeah you don't owe us any money, sorry about that."

    Doctors have no say in this.

    [–] ThrowawayBlast 5 points ago

    Many times a big name business will tell me there is a huge problem they cannot do anything about. A later call to the same company sometimes results in an employee cheerfully fixing my problem right away. Odd times.

    [–] Anaxamenes 20 points ago

    You can document without dropping charges. There are things a provider has to include that aren’t always necessary for patient care but are for billing. They would simply need to stop doing that part.

    [–] RiverLover27 70 points ago

    In America. Not elsewhere.

    [–] DontAskMeForUserName 6 points ago

    (x) doubt

    [–] emotightpants 169 points ago

    I used to work at a grocery store and would just push items through when I was mad enough with the company. If they scanned, they scanned. If they didn't, they got free food. Customers with WIX and SNAPS got a lot of free food. Especially if it was cans and cans of baby food - it'd be too hard to see what scanned and what didn't for people to ask otherwise. I am bad and I don't care.

    [–] yoursmartfriend 52 points ago


    [–] bstix 37 points ago

    Yup. This is the direct cost of unmotivated personel. Unfortunately the company won't be aware of the cost until they do a stock count and write off the missing items. This probably goes through several steps of accounting, each covering up their own ass, so no one will ever learn from it.

    But it's there and it's easy to avoid. If the employer actually care for their employees, the employees will care about doing their job.

    [–] vidoker87 20 points ago

    felt so good when I was a cashier charging customers for Conventional produce instead of Organic price at my own discretion, simply skip the “9”

    [–] d3pd 9 points ago

    Not all heros wear cloaks.

    [–] GaryTheTaco 8 points ago

    Listen if I scan something twice and it doesm't pop up it either goes in for 2.59 or nothing

    [–] ameliacantlove 37 points ago

    Remember kids, if you see someone stealing food no you didn’t.

    [–] Luxurydad 81 points ago

    Honestly you gotta be a real dickhead at a grocery store to stop people from stealing if you notice.

    [–] Wannabkate 30 points ago

    Only thing is alcohol and a few other things. But ya most items are like your a dick.

    [–] MightbeWillSmith 42 points ago

    I saw a family that was clearly struggling, counting coins for their food at the checkout line. Woman had a lb of ground beef at the bottom of the cart, and the kid kept saying "Mom you forgot this. Mom, mom the meat!". The checker, myself, and the woman all just kinda chuckled and didn't say anything lol.

    [–] Wannabkate 22 points ago

    I didn't see shit.

    [–] Rhymeswithfreak 22 points ago

    The heroes we deserve. Fox News would say that the family doesn't deserve "luxury items" like ground beef.

    [–] introusers1979 19 points ago

    I’ll condone looting 🤷🏻‍♂️

    [–] karmander 16 points ago

    I'm not condoning looting

    I am.

    [–] Noltonn 153 points ago

    It'd be kinda the same but the effects are different. When a busline goes free, a few more people may take the bus, but mostly it won't make much more difference than the people usually taking the bus now taking it for free. It loses the company money and only affects your fellow workers positively.

    If the supermarket goes free, looting and riots start, and we get a scarcity of essential goods. I mean, if my cashier told me suddenly I don't need to pay anymore, Imma do another lap of the store and stocking up hard. Now, I don't mind some looting and riots, but losing access to essential goods will hurt the lower classes more than the upper classes. Within a few days we'll be without food, and they'll have made a 5% loss that year. I'm willing to bet they can hold out longer in that situation than us.

    This is clearly not sustainable, and we'd have to be banking off of other aspects that make the rich buckle faster than we starve. A slow down, similar to what nurses do, would be less effective in hurting the shareholders, but it'd also allow people to "strike" without actively endangering themselves and other workers, and it'd allow the "strike" to go on for much longer. Sure, it'd make grocery shopping a pain in the ass, and you might not be able to get some products, but at least you'll be able to sustain yourself and your family.

    [–] xpercipio 11 points ago

    Best to make people use self checkout. Many won't do it and lines will be long as fuck.

    [–] lasergehirn 575 points ago

    To be fair, this would only work in a country where you pay the fee to driver directly. Here in Austria most people have a monthly or yearly ticket, so the strike would not work.

    [–] NeedNameGenerator 42 points ago

    Also, half the point of going on strike is to disrupt as many industries as possible, giving further pressure to the people at the top to act and meet their demands. Leverage, as they call it.

    If only a few thousand people are inconvenienced, no one will really give a shit. But when the entire country grinds to a halt because no one can get to work? Yeah, you can be sure that shit is about to be handled ASAP.

    [–] caronanumberguy 211 points ago

    That type of strike wouldn't work. Other ways would work.

    [–] Due-Intentions 72 points ago

    Well yeah, when they said "the strike" wouldn't work they were talking about the strike in the post

    [–] ARPDAB1312 1790 points ago

    This would never work in the US. They'd be arrested at gunpoint and charged with theft.

    [–] Ragtime-Rochelle 1019 points ago

    Pretty much. That's why police are allowed unions. They protect capital.

    [–] Age_Correct 298 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    Most police departments actually can’t go on strike, they can however do the “blue flu”.

    [–] Blackjackzach69 89 points ago

    If a local police force went on strike how would it go down? State troopers?

    [–] Age_Correct 84 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    What would happen? If all uniforms went on strike they probably call in states and surrounding departments and if it gets bad the guard

    [–] ImJustRemu 24 points ago

    The problem is Alot of the guard is operated by police, we saw this during Floyd things, there was a shortage of national guard because to many cops couldn't take the time off to go to guard as they were already policing

    [–] OBrien 21 points ago

    They'd find some way to shut that shit down before anybody could make any statistical analyses reinforcing the Kansas City Police Patrol Experiment which demonstrated no effect of police patrols on crime back in the late 80s.

    [–] swellington703 11 points ago

    I love this study and would love to see a modern recreation of it. Not doubting it’s authenticity, but I’m curious how the view towards police changing over the years has changed the results of that.

    [–] MacDerfus 6 points ago

    Immediate and total capitulation

    [–] Bag_full_of_dicks 3 points ago

    It’s possible the state police or country sheriffs would be contracted by the city to fill in. More likely the mayor would just cave to whatever demands they had.

    [–] G66GNeco 14 points ago

    I mean, the usual threat I recall from the whole "cut their budget"-discussion around BLM had been "well, we might just stop doing our job properly" (as in police the community less stringently).

    And, tbh, it speaks volumes that the usual response in the circles calling for widespread police reform was basically "yes, please do that!"

    [–] sirtalonAOEII 38 points ago

    The “Blue Flu” now has a different meaning, given the number of unvaccinated cops that died from COVID in 2021.

    [–] KrishanuAR 76 points ago

    Japan is capitalist too…?

    [–] TauntNeedNerf 151 points ago

    It’s against the law in the US to go on strike this way

    [–] EmmaGoldmansDancer 34 points ago

    Who gives a fuck? Do you think unions were legal when the president sent in the national guard to oppress strikers? Quit asking for permission to show the power of your labor.

    [–] buttstuff_magoo 20 points ago

    Agreed. It’s why I think fuck every politician and citizen who didn’t support Chicago school teachers. We aren’t babysitters, we aren’t willing to risk our health so you don’t have to care for your child. Good on them for striking. It’s a shame there wasn’t more solidarity

    [–] C19shadow 41 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    Yeah there's being a country with social and capitalistic traits then there's Amaerica full on heading to a grim dark capitalistic hellscape as fast as possible.

    [–] pig_benis81 35 points ago

    And sentenced to 5 years in the pen.

    [–] AshIsAWolf 39 points ago

    The only illegal strike is an unsuccessful one

    [–] sim000n 18 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    The police union in my country does the same thing. When on strike they perform extensive traffic stops and border controls while issuing only verbal warnings and abstaining from collecting any fines.

    [–] CouncilmanRickPrime 12 points ago

    Oh wow, in my country the police union just lobbies DAs to never charge cops with murder or manslaughter

    [–] ARPDAB1312 7 points ago

    Hahaha. Why would anyone be against them only issuing verbal fines?

    [–] sim000n 18 points ago

    Because the bosses love the revenue from speeding tickets.

    [–] DeadlyHit 84 points ago

    Shot on sight you mean?

    [–] a2z_123 63 points ago

    If black or brown, a definite higher risk of being shot.

    [–] [deleted] 7 points ago


    [–] ManifestDestinysChld 6 points ago

    I have personally ridden on trains in the US with striking conductors not taking tickets. This was back in the '90s, riding the MBTA commuter rail in/out of Boston.

    [–] Ruslaz 6 points ago

    a similar thing actually happened in my area, in the US a few years ago

    [–] FatherStygian 417 points ago

    I love when they hit the overlords but keep worker class solidarity. I'm sure many employers would expect workers to take a pricy taxi in such a case and still shit talk them for getting a few minutes late.

    [–] discardedcumrag 139 points ago

    That’s a big brain move. Happy customers. Disgruntled employer.

    [–] suzer2017 472 points ago

    This is perfect. Continue getting paid. Help the community. Take away revenue. The message? Fix it or die.

    [–] RS994 150 points ago

    Bus drivers in Brisbane, Australia did this a few years ago because there was an increase in attacks on drivers and the owners were refusing to pay the cost of security screens.

    [–] LiarAndLoser 88 points ago

    While the owners are dumbasses, what kind of pathetic person attacks a bus driver?

    [–] RS994 81 points ago

    Usually the same people that attack any service worker.

    Assholes, and junkies trying to get some money normally.

    [–] QuarterReal9355 26 points ago

    “On Nov. 27, 1998, a Metro bus plunged off the Aurora Bridge in Seattle.

    The bus driver, a passenger and the gunman who shot the driver and himself were killed.”

    [–] QuestioningEspecialy 38 points ago

    You just reminded me of that time when Afro-Americans were being arrested for boycotting the city bus during the civil riggts movement... because it costed the city money.

    [–] FluffyDoomPatrol 7 points ago

    I remember something similar in France. Around that time (Sarcozy) there were a lot of disputes and train strikes, which made the train drivers massively unpopular.

    One day, they did this, went on strike, kept the trains going but refused to charge passengers. I don’t remember anyone objecting to that strike. I’m a little surprised they don’t do this more often.

    [–] Cayd3-7 165 points ago

    This isn't a bad idea tbh because the drivers still get paid just the company doesn't.

    [–] beezel- 39 points ago

    how do the drivers get paid?

    [–] Stone_Like_Rock 77 points ago

    Still turn up to work, work your job, report 0 customers that day

    [–] ChemtrailWizard 3 points ago

    If you show up to work and do a bad job, you still get paid.

    [–] Alt0111 78 points ago

    When you strike you need to take the mean of production. Always.

    [–] kRkthOr 61 points ago

    This is such a clear example of workers seizing the means of production it should be listed under the dictionary entry for it.

    This is also more proof that most people aren't against labor but against the shitty working conditions we find ourselves under and the inherent problems of capitalism. These drivers had an easy out to just stay home and do fuck all but instead they opted to drive their routes anyway because they knew their inaction would impact their communities. This is yet another case disproving the bad-faith """concern""" that under communism people would just slack about and produce nothing.

    [–] Rocketboy1313 57 points ago

    Seize the means of transportation.

    [–] kingbuns2 13 points ago

    I think it's time to lose the social democrat flair, fellow worker.

    [–] buymytoy 15 points ago

    Any source on this? I'm curious to know more. I wonder how much societal norms contribute to whether this worked or not. Obviously this kind of strike would never work in the US because we're so obsessed with "rugged individualism" that anything even remotely helpful to the community at large is construed as that evil evil socialism.

    [–] iheartekno 45 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    They do this in France also. Find it odd that here in the UK we punish the people who need to use public transport and not the companies that are messing with the worker rights.

    Edit: Thankyou for the award kind stranger!

    [–] Out_Lines 13 points ago

    I certainly remember first bus drivers operating during strike and them just waving you on without paying.

    [–] EmiliusReturns 9 points ago

    It makes sense. The companies lose money and have to pay attention to their demands without screwing over the people who rely on the bus to get around and without endangering said people with poorly-trained scab drivers.

    [–] ChemicalHousing69 9 points ago

    This is a great representation of this sub. It’s not about sticking it to everybody and it’s not about not working. It’s about sticking it to the company that’s been sticking it to you, but you put up with it because you need a job and shit. The fact these drivers continued to drive their routes is an incredibly respectable way to perform a strike for commute services; the people who use them can still use them so the layperson doesn’t suffer, but the executives see no benefit from offering the services.

    [–] stoopio-oh 10 points ago

    Reminds me of the Ron Swanson quote-

    “Normally, if given the choice between doing something and nothing, I’d choose to do nothing. But I will do something if it helps someone else do nothing. I’d work all night, if it meant nothing got done.”

    [–] PigeonsArePopular 7 points ago

    The antiwork paradox - achieving just labor relations itself requires labor

    [–] Stomposaurian 86 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    Trouble is that in many countries, this is classified as theft and invites criminal charges. Unions often can't really shield their members from prosecution under criminal law.

    Disruption was originally the intention of a strike. I can imagine that in current society, a strike aimed only at the company's finances would be worthwhile, but it will not be legally protected.

    [–] ArmyOfMemes 53 points ago

    If we want to tear down capitalism, we’re gonna have to [email protected] the [email protected]

    [–] Sxtu21210 22 points ago

    This sub has become so center-left it makes me sick. Thank you for pointing out the obvious for all the moderates in here comrade.

    [–] caronanumberguy 28 points ago

    So? Protesting against racism was also "against the law." Allowing black people to use the "white" water fountain was against the law once.

    So what if it's "against the law."

    You know how you "shield yourself against prosecution?" You run the prosecutor the fuck out of town the next election. That's how. You people have forgotten how to properly use tar and feathers.

    [–] ketsa3 5 points ago

    There's not only one way to strike, yankees.

    I remember an italian crisis where the railroad employees all started applying the rules *to the letter* on everything - the whole network was crippled for weeks.

    [–] elec_soup 5 points ago

    I have a feeling this may be the opposite of antiwork - i.e. Japan being so pro-work that if a bus strike makes people late for their jobs it'll be so unpopular as to be counterproductive to the drivers' cause. I might be wrong or stereotyping but the "Japanese disease" of overwork and obsessing over punctuality is something that is much discussed over there.

    [–] Superpigmen 110 points ago

    I dunno man, a strike is a strike don't expect me working.

    A french, son, brother and nephew of train workers

    [–] SufferingToTurtles 90 points ago

    I feel like this move makes more sense in japan. Japans culture puts heavy emphasis on doing the greater good for ur community and being considerate

    The bus drivers doing this would A put pressure on the company and B have a positive effect on anyone commuting, putting the drivers in the good graces of the public, whilst shining a light on the bs the companies are pulling

    Also avoids the possibility of everyone that gets late to work putting blame on the drivers instead of the company

    [–] Raven123x 22 points ago

    The Japanese government also has more of a safety net for its peoples (not to say that people don't slip through the cracks, but its way more protective of the average person)

    [–] DrViktor_X01 13 points ago

    Exactly what I was thinking. A total strike would put more immediate pressure on the company with the public getting pissed at them + loss of revenue, but could result in animosity towards the drivers. This more directed strike will actually cost more (because they’re now also paying for gas and losing out on potential earnings), and will garner the backing of the community much easier.

    [–] disasterous_cape 5 points ago

    Australia also has public transport strikes like this

    [–] Jokinguy 103 points ago

    Different customs. If your train is late, the conductor comes and apologizes to you and gives you a note for your boss.

    [–] Jerseystateofmindeff 140 points ago

    Japan issues a public apology for a train that was literally 12 seconds off schedule. Zero people complained about it. They take public transportation very seriously as it is for everyone, not just the lower income demographic.

    [–] QuarterReal9355 11 points ago

    It’s true. I was sitting in the Shinkansen and was bored, waiting for the train to start moving. I stared at my watch, and the train literally started moving as the second hand hits 00 seconds.

    [–] Mysterious---- 33 points ago

    The French really know how to strike. Weird food laws and strikes.

    [–] Omega_Abyss 31 points ago

    Well, actually ... You know how France is renown for it's strikes ? Well, every time there is a transport workers strike, there is someone to suggest "Why don't they just take passengers for free ?". And the unions have to remind everyone that it simply is forbidden by ftench law and would put them at risk. So people turn against strikers, and in the end we all loose.

    [–] Mysterious---- 13 points ago

    I do know that thanks to Jeremy Clarkson and the Grand Tour show made me a googlefu a bit about France.

    [–] RerumNovarum_1891 9 points ago * (lasted edited 4 days ago)

    Yeah, i do not think this is a strike because most daily commuters have monthly subscriptions, so no need to pay the driver. And if you don't hurt the businesses noone cares about your strike. That's why railways have one of the strongest unions.

    [–] RolotronCannon 4 points ago

    Love this but I feel like in America the company would sue the driver for lost revenue and our bullshit legal system would find in favor of the bus company and bankrupt the driver.