I wish it would become standard to report these things not as a single number, but as yearly increases paired with the contract duration. That would make it much easier to put them into context, and compare them to other deals or inflation.
Just the number alone without context can also be straight up misleading. I remember that when train personel went on strike here in Germany, I saw some articles comparing the demand and offer by just mentioning that single number, and they seemed fairly close. Well, one was over 2 and the other over 3 years, making them massively different in practice.
It’s intentional. Big number makes big headlines plus paints union as greedy, . demanding enormous raises the rest of us only dream of (or maybe we should join a union?)
I wish it would become standard to report these things not as a single number, but as yearly increases paired with the contract duration. That would make it much easier to put them into context, and compare them to other deals or inflation.
Just the number alone without context can also be straight up misleading. I remember that when train personel went on strike here in Germany, I saw some articles comparing the demand and offer by just mentioning that single number, and they seemed fairly close. Well, one was over 2 and the other over 3 years, making them massively different in practice.
It’s intentional. Big number makes big headlines plus paints union as greedy, . demanding enormous raises the rest of us only dream of (or maybe we should join a union?)