[regnull]

I don't think it's a question of who deserves what. They deserve a living wage. The kids deserve to get their presents on time. I deserve a pony. The question is how whether to see it as a smart tactical choice to get that they "deserve" or a cynical move to strike when they get maximum publicity and do maximum damage.

[onlyrealcuzzo]

Isn't that the whole point of a strike?

You're going to have a bad time if you plan your strike at the most opportune time for your company.

Whether or not striking is good for society is a separate discussion, but striking when you have the most leverage over your company makes the most sense for those striking to get what they want.

[lcnPylGDnU4H9OF]

Just to add to this, the point of laborers striking is to show the company the value of their labor. If laborers not laboring means profiteers not profiting, it's good for the laborers' negotiating power because the profiteers really want to profit.

[aguaviva]

I would apply the term "cynical" to the decisions made by Amazon's management which create the working conditions that compel their workers to strike, while providing top 1% compensation to themselves.

These people are just doing what they have to do to survive. If anything, going on strike a truly desparate move. Insinuating that they are childishing in doing so (as if they feel they "deserve a pony") on the other hand, seems simply -- snide.