• digistil@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    TL;DR: Sweden’s transport agency will have to pay a $95k fine if they won’t deliver license plates to Tesla.

    • Unspec7@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      To clarify, STA just needs to figure out a way to get them to Tesla through some means other than PostNord. Before the injunction, they were required to by regulation to send it via PN, and so it was not a “we refuse” but more of a “we literally can’t without breaking the law”. The injunction basically lets them circumvent the regulation.

  • IllustriousAd1591@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah it was pretty obvious from the beginning that refusing to deliver essential government goods wasn’t going to go over well

      • Unspec7@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not even the swedish transportation agency workers that are refusing.

        The post office workers are the ones refusing to deliver it. Since swedish regulation requires the plates to be delivered via PostNord, the STA had its hand tied until the court injunction basically gave them temporary permission to ignore the regulation.

        • A_bit_disappointing@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The court hasn’t told them to ignore these regulations. They just told them that they have 7 days to make sure that Tesla gets its plates. But they are as you said forced to by their own rules to only give them out through PostNord because of a contract they have.

          • Unspec7@alien.topB
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The injunction says to get the plates to Tesla using any means, including direct delivery.

            • A_bit_disappointing@alien.topB
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              We’ll see what transportstyrelsen will do about this. They have rules which say that they can only give out plates through PostNord.

  • L44KSO@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    A) if the setup of tesla is better already than the union, then sign the god damn paper.

    B) Government bound to use PN and PN decides not to fulfil its obligations, why is the government having to pay for that and not PN?

    • Unspec7@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because PostNord workers are constitutionally allowed to strike and refuse to work with Tesla.

    • bindermichi@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah. Most media outlets seem to be as incapable of this distinction as most redditors in here.

      All the court decided is that they should not continue the strike until the court has decided on the issue.

  • Snazzy21@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Tesla has a policy of not signing collective bargaining agreements and says its employees have as good, or better, terms than those demanded by IF Metall.

    If this was true wouldn’t Tesla be embracing them with open arms? I know the share holders would love it. Not believable at all.

    • Troggie42@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      yeah let’s just check and see what the CEO of the company says about unions

      uh ohhhh lmao

    • tugtugtugtug4@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Leaving aside the amount of money union vs. non-union labor costs, its not surprising that employers oppose unionization because it constrains their flexibility on labor. Makes it harder to fire or restructure workers and creates labor uncertainties around strikes.

    • thisnismycoolname@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Shareholders would not love it as it cedes control of the company to the union. One needs only look at the recent union issues at Ford and GM to see why.

    • Salsalito_Turkey@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      If they “embraced them with open arms,” that would open them up to the risk of strikes from now on until the end of time, including “sympathy strikes” like this one, where employees refuse to perform their duties even when their own employer has done nothing wrong.