Wal-Mart Tells Workers: Don’t Download Labor Group’s Chat App

Post by Sanddancer » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 8:08 PM UTC

vitus wrote: post #23

0xcde4c3db wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's totally unsurprising to hear. Wal-Mart apparently defaults to portraying unions as pure evil. I don't know what the current procedure is like, but they used to make new hires watch laughably biased "educational" videos about unions. I don't remember the contents in detail, just that they roughly reminded me of '80s anti-drug PSAs/specials, with union organizers essentially taking the place of the "drug pusher"…

I think the parent comment was pointing out that the foxbusiness article was pretty blatant plagiarism -- in fact, if you go through the two articles side-by-side, you can see that the foxbusiness article is pretty much taken verbatim, albeit some slight restructuring (that IMO harms the overall flow of the piece). One point, though, although I'm not sure how to interpret this, is that the original author (Nassauer)…

Post by jimmywanger » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 8:11 PM UTC

cryptarch wrote: post #45

VLM wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But not in one giant queryable SQL table. I'd worry about parallelized spearfishing attacks across multiple stores, "Good Morning DEF, have I reached store number 12345 cash handling office? OK good to hear, this ABC at walmart corporate IT calling back about that trouble ticket your coworker XYZ entered about your store in Springfield, is XYZ at work now? Oh OK, well, anyway the ticket says XYZ is having trouble acc…

Uhhh... "facebook can't query user data"? Facebook even has the current occupation and location data of users, so of course they can find out at what specific store you work! Facebook has a larger user base with richer data on them, than the app in the story. None of that data is E2E encrypted, and all of it is available to (some) FB employees. I think your FUD is unjustified here.

Post by TorKlingberg » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 8:13 PM UTC

mythrwy wrote: post #26

Animats wrote: post #11

It's an illegal labor practice in the US for an employer to do that. It's interference with the right to bargain collectively. But WalMart probably doesn't have much to fear from the Labor Department. Even under the current administration, enforcement is weak, and it will probably be weaker under the next administration. It's really tough to organize a union today, even though the law as written is pro-union.

I don't know. The next administration might actually be tougher re: pro-worker laws against multi-national importers of Chinese made stuff. This might not apply to unions necessarily though.

Post by luckydata » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 8:15 PM UTC

mythrwy wrote: post #26

Animats wrote: post #11

It's an illegal labor practice in the US for an employer to do that. It's interference with the right to bargain collectively. But WalMart probably doesn't have much to fear from the Labor Department. Even under the current administration, enforcement is weak, and it will probably be weaker under the next administration. It's really tough to organize a union today, even though the law as written is pro-union.

I don't know. The next administration might actually be tougher re: pro-worker laws against multi-national importers of Chinese made stuff. This might not apply to unions necessarily though.

Post by woofyman » Sun, Nov 20, 2016, 8:18 PM UTC

chrissnell wrote: post #52

adamnemecek wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> re: pro-worker laws against multi-national importers of Chinese made stuff. The pro-worker stuff was just to attract that demographic, I'm pretty sure.

I think that people should give the Trump administration a chance. The GOP knows that blue collar whites were the force behind his election. He's going to have to deliver for these laborers if he wants to have a chance in 2020.