,
15 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
The way many lefties are knee jerk attacking Labor for failing to block high end tax cuts when the anger should be directed at Libs and cross bench, reminds me of union members attacking union when their pay rise isn’t big enough, rather than their boss. A thread👇🏻
Just as union negotiates on behalf of their members and wider workforce for a desired pay rise, Labor tried to split the tax bill so they could oppose high end cuts, and support low and middle cuts as per their election position.
Labor weren’t able to get what they wanted - their amendments to split the bill didn’t get crossbench support in both houses. Imagine same happens in union negotiation - a 5% pay rise is rejected, management stubbornly giving only 3%.
Now imagine you’re at the union meeting where the 3% pay rise is being discussed. Delegates and members are angry that it’s not enough - they want 5%! Where do they direct their anger?
In my experience, many direct their anger at the union. ‘The union should have negotiated better’ they say. ‘The union should have stood firm on principle’ they say. ‘I’m quitting the union because my pay rise isn’t big enough’ - I’ve literally heard this said.
Clearly, the union has tried to get 5% pay rise and have only agreed to 3% because they haven’t had the power to make management budge. But question is, why does the most powerful in this negotiation - management - get away with the union being blamed: the union losing members?
This all comes back to the unconscious assumptions we make about right and left wing politics. We think the right have authority and lack empathy, and the left have empathy but lack authority. The union should ‘care more’ than management because they’ve promised to have our backs
On the other hand, management are expected to work against the interests of the workers in opposing pay rises, so when management does what they’re expected to do, people shrug and say ‘as expected’. This means anger isn’t directed at management even though they denied 5% rise.
What this situation ends up meaning is that unions and left wing political parties are blamed when they don’t deliver promised change, because they put themselves in a position of trust with people who need their help. When they can’t deliver what the people want, they’re blamed.
When the left don’t have the power to do what they’ve promised - get a pay rise for workers or to block high end tax cuts - many on the left blame them for their lack of power, instead of blaming the right wing for using their power to do what the people don’t want them to.
In the end, it means the right wingers, business owners, bosses, executives - anyone representing the more powerful party - get a free pass. They’re not expected to be empathetic so when they’re not, that’s just water off a duck’s back.
What this also means is that the left in politics is judged by a different standard than the right. No one expects Liberals to behave properly - they have authority to do what they want. Scandals are ‘meh, that’s what’s we expect of Libs’.
Even the whiff of a scandal for Labor is a huge problem, the end of careers - hello Sam Dastyari, yet Angas Taylor skates on through. Same happens everywhere - look how Trump gets away with sexual assault accusations, just to name one obvious example.
So yeah, I do get frustrated when lefties on here spend all their energy attacking Labor when Labor fail to block high end tax cuts - they did their best! - yet I don’t see them giving same treatment to Liberals OR crossbench who just get away with it. End.
@threadreaderapp unroll please
