• Th4tGuyII@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Probably - because the amount of money they’re about to lose was probably less than what actually negotiating with the union would’ve cost them

      • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        15 hours ago

        How many people do your think they employ? Because I performed seconds of painstaking research and came up with 80k, so I divided $40B by 80k employees and I get $500k/worker.

        They could afford to give everyone a 25k raise and it would be 20 years before it cost them a dime.

        That doesn’t seem like a smart business decision.

        • Th4tGuyII@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          15 hours ago

          By that calculation, even on the lower end of only losing $20 billion that’d still be 10 years before it’d cost them anymore than this rancid business decision did.

          They’re so determined to not negotiate with the union that they’d rather throw away the shareholder’s money than give it to workers… And that’s just this scheduled strike. If talks fail again, I bet you there will be more to come.

          Samsung might have a difficult time explaining that one at their shareholder presentation next year.