To anyone who decides to say that this represents care workers' abandoning those they care for: it is always the *company's* fault.

My solidarity to these workers. https://twitter.com/UVWunion/status/1339233777860665344

The oppression of disabled people through the capitalist care system is a structural question. On the one hand, the disabled are entombed in facilities that resemble prisons. On the other, care workers are paid a pittance as their job concerns reproductive labour.

The oppression of women thus leads care to be considered "women's work", thus worthy of low wages.

Reproductive labour in care operates by taking away agency from the disabled, transforming them into commodities.

Both sides of the labour of care feel capitalist oppression.

The problem is both that capital organises care per se, producing pressure on workers' to "increase productivity" by spending less time per patient at miniscule wages, and that reproductive labour is structured around disabled people and women's specific relation to capital.

The solution to these contradictions can only be realised by a socialist care system, putting disabled people in control of their own care, relocated in communities.

This is all to say the structural contradiction cannot be used to morally ambush strike action. Full support!

(Going to such length to put this argument across clearly here because you damn well know the capitalists will weaponise a moral frame of abandoning disabled/elderly people to rationalise strike breaking. Did with the doctors and nurses a few years back; will here.)