Doesn't it? It usually signifies abuses like being paid in company "currency" only usable in company owned stores, being unable to change jobs without having to move ( with the associated inability to refuse whatever the employer throws at you, however hard/illegal/dangerous).
Is there anything positive about company towns? Maybe they're better than towns with no jobs, but I'm not even sure about that..
> Does it? I've never heard of companies not paying the workers any money, just because they have their own town
Yes, because it's now illegal, at least in the US where this practice was pervasive.
> That is true for many job changes. If it is a big deal for someone they can just not join such a company.
There's a world of difference between there are few options for jobs without changing your field ( e.g. working as a waiter/waitress when in a financial emergency) and literally having zero jobs outside of a company where you live. One is " we probably have to move if i piss off my boss", the other is "we need to move".
> Huh? Having a company town doesn't grant the company absolute authority. They still have to abide by the laws of the land
That's extremely naive. Everyone in that town works for the company or has immediate family working for it. How many people would dare refuse or blow the whistle on illegal activities when their lives would be uprooted as a consequence? The power dynamic is very heavily tilted towards the employer.
Is there anything positive about company towns? Maybe they're better than towns with no jobs, but I'm not even sure about that..