"strike proof" industries can mean one of the following:
1. Labor is so automated that you need little to no workers.
2. Workers are exploited and union-busted to such a degree that they cannot organize.
You'll notice both outcomes are bad for the workers. What you're suggesting is so incredibly one-sided no worker in their right mind would take it up.
This is about compromise, as is all things in life. If your solution is "one side loses heavily and the other side wins everything", you don't have a solution, you have a delusion.
In the long run yes, it would be nice to not require labor, and everyone lives happily ever after. In the short run people suffer. They starve, they live on the streets, they turn to drugs, and they die. If that sounds harsh that's because it is. There's a reason these people are working manual labor jobs and aren't fucking around on a computer for 3 productive hours a day. There's a reason they've "chosen" to toil away for 8+ hours for a comparatively low wage. If you're not considering what happens to them, you're not seeing the problem as a whole.
Strikes are the most powerful tool that unions have to drive up wages. It's not like these are unrelated concepts. There are many union activists and social scientists who can persuasively argue that without the ability to strike, unions cease to function.
> He didn't say "wages need to come down" he said "industries need to be strike proof."
Those two statements are equivalent. Or do you think the capitalist business owner is going to pay is employees more out of the kindness of his own hard, if only they couldn't strike?
The whole point of a strike is that it "harms their company," because being able to do that is the only way many workers have any leverage.
> Software engineers don't really strike in a way that harms their company.
Software engineers have been the beneficiaries of some really cushy market conditions over the last couple decades, which are pretty much guaranteed not to last.
> Those two statements are equivalent. Or do you think the capitalist business owner is going to pay is employees more out of the kindness of his own hard, if only they couldn't strike?
The capitalist business owner will pay the minimum wage to get the employees they need. This isn't a bad thing.
You don't need a strike, you need a strong labor market.
> Software engineers have been the beneficiaries of some really cushy market conditions over the last couple decades, which are pretty much guaranteed not to last.
Yes, and unions are not gonna fix that. Machinists and factory workers are unionized and their jobs still kind of suck - simply because it is not possible to run a globally competitive company if you have to pay your machinists a ton.
Compared to car industry or longshore industry or mining industry, software already looks fairly strike-proof. Not many unions or successful strikes there.
