this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2026
833 points (98.9% liked)
Work Reform
17372 readers
2636 users here now
A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.
Our Philosophies:
- All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
- Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
- Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
- We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.
Our Goals
- Higher wages for underpaid workers.
- Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
- Better and fewer working hours.
- Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
- Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's kind of a problem that they own the stock. It's not the people that own the ETFs or mutual funds that get to vote with the shares. Instead, a company gets to amass that power using other people's money.
I don't know what a good solution is, but it's very much a problem.
A 401(k) is a magical process wherein one person invests money in the stock market, but another person controls their stockholder voting privileges.
I don't know how it all works, but I did see on Vanguard there's an option to change how vanguard votes on your behalf. There's the default of "maximum profit", but there's also "long term stability" and "ethical" (not the exact names). I don't think every company has options like that, but they probably should, if we're going to keep this kind of thing around at all.
If you use vanguard, go see what your options are.
Edit: think I found it https://corporate.vanguard.com/content/corporatesite/us/en/corp/about-our-funds/proxy-voting-across-funds/investor-choice.html#policy-options
None of them look super good though
The fact that it exists and they're making a whole thing of letting you opt out of doing that, tells you a lot about what the standard practice in the industry is.
Yeah there's no option for genuine environmental or social activism, just one that follows some other investment company's ostensibly ethical voting strategy. Again, this speaks TONS about the Epstein class running these funds, that they're scared that giving such an option might result in people actually taking it.
This might be the most evil thing I've learned about this year.
The insidious part is that this type of fund manager doesn't care anything about what each company actually does or even their long-term future, they're driven entirely by what will get them their bonuses for this year. It's why we get enshittification. CEOs who don't deliver YoY growth get voted out in favour of ones who will.