Why is this problematic? I find the idea of unions distasteful. Why should all employees be obligated to join a union? It would make more sense if it was voluntary and people collectively bargain as a subgroup whose size is smaller than all employees. But forcing a single union upon all employees is just creating a separate parallel management structure, one that often tends towards practices that ultimately deliver less for customers by legitimizing things like tenure-based rules. Having a single union also eliminates competition - I just don't see why that is a good thing. And what stops employees from just forming their own company to provide a service that is contracted out? The company can choose whether or not to use their services based on their offer.
Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions
151–160 of 468 posts
Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions
#152Really disappointing to see the "Well, what did you expect?" comments already. Just because companies have been trying to prevent organization of their labor for over a century doesn't mean it isn't still messed up now. It's easy to say that it's just the way the world works from your desk, the people who are forced to work in Amazon's warehouses with terrible working conditions don't have that luxury.
For those who identify strongly with unions, union-busting stuff like this is triggering... like "bringing up the war" in a war traumatised nation. I get that. But... 2020 isn't 1920 or even 1980. Fresh eyes might see more clearly. To the advantage of union organisers, mass communication and organisation is a lot easier today. Surveillance is easier too. IDK. Yes, Bezos does not want an amazon union and won't just le…
If employees know that discussing unionizing or showing any pro-union tendency or behavior is going to arm their career prospects (or maybe even make them lose their job altogether) it's definitely going to be a lot harder for them to organize.
I can't believe people here people here manage to justify this abject behavior as "business as usual". This is not normal, not legal and shouldn't be accepted.
Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yes, Bezos does not want an amazon union and won't just let it happen without a fight. Same as always. Which is, if I recalled correctly, illegal.
Maybe in spirit. In reality, bezos and any future amazon union are opposed to one another. That's a pretty firmly embedded truism in union thinking too. No point getting outraged over the trite. Also, this is not even amazon getting serious yet. Imagine what happens when/if amazon union organisers ever make a credible effort.
Don't underestimate what a desperate individual will do when they've lost everything to Bezos greed.
Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the people who are forced to work in Amazon's warehouses with terrible working conditions don't have that luxury. Who is forced to work in Amazon's warehouses? Is Amazon rounding up people with guns everyday to make them work there?
Most of the world's natural resources and land have already been claimed. This means that most people have no choice but to work for the people who control those resources and land.
Not only that, land that once belonged to the people was privatized during the Industrial Revolution in order to create a landless class of people that needed to work in the new factories in order to eat. It was hard to convince people to work in them otherwise.
Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions
#155Really disappointing to see the "Well, what did you expect?" comments already. Just because companies have been trying to prevent organization of their labor for over a century doesn't mean it isn't still messed up now. It's easy to say that it's just the way the world works from your desk, the people who are forced to work in Amazon's warehouses with terrible working conditions don't have that luxury.
Where do we draw the line? What tactics are ok for a company to use to combat unions if it doesn't want them? Or should companies just accept and work with any union that forms?
They could do whatever they're doing with their tech workers. Around these parts any talk of unionizing developers is usually meet with skepticism or derision. So whatever big tech is doing is keeping most of their tech workers happy and unwilling to unionize.
They could do the same for their warehouse employees, but that would mean paying them very well and giving good benefits.
Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
Speaking with my wallet. I no longer use Amazon. Though my employer users AWS. I don't have any swing over that sadly. But for my own money, no more Amazon.
I have stopped ordering from amazon.com but do still use AWS. I should probably evaluate other cloud providers, when I made the decision to use AWS about 5 years ago there were no other providers that offered all the functionality I wanted. It was also easy enough to throw a rock and hit a certified aws consultant.
At this point the cloud provider that is the least shitty as a company is probably... Microsoft? Damn what has the world come to
Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions
#157"Pinkerton: for over one-hundred years, the ones to call when you've got a union problem." I mean, that has to be their schtick, right, even if it's unspoken? Because that pretty much sums up what I know about Pinkerton, so I would assume they are happy with that. As for the topic at hand, yeah well, that's what companies do...for over one-hundred years as well.
To the point where if someone ever introduces themselves to me as a Pinkerton employee, my first instinct would be to assume they're immoral and not someone I want to know. It's a company with a history of supporting exploitation wherever it's gone.
By extension, anyone you meet who works at Amazon should be considered that as well. Google and Facebook too probably. Walmart? Honestly any corporation. Add anyone working for the government in there as well
Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
It really amazes me what some people think qualifies for a “human right”. If you are paying someone and they are doing something you told them not to do isn’t it your “human right” to stop paying them? Where do you draw the line with what a “human right” is?
Think about it this way: both sides have the right to freely negotiate a contract, and then decide whether or not to enter into it. The CEO can't prevent the workers from talking to each other and figuring out what they think a fair contract would be, and the workers can't prevent the CEO from talking to other CEOs for the same reason. The specific human right is usually referred to as "freedom of association". You c…
Sure but if both sides have the human right to freely associate, then the employer should surely have the right to reject associating with the union at all. But that's not afforded to them under US law, per my understanding.
Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where do we draw the line? What tactics are ok for a company to use to combat unions if it doesn't want them? Or should companies just accept and work with any union that forms?
They could do whatever they're doing with their tech workers. Around these parts any talk of unionizing developers is usually meet with skepticism or derision. So whatever big tech is doing is keeping most of their tech workers happy and unwilling to unionize. They could do the same for their warehouse employees, but that would mean paying them very well and giving good benefits.
It's not really feasible to pay their box packers $120k / year.
Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
It really amazes me what some people think qualifies for a “human right”. If you are paying someone and they are doing something you told them not to do isn’t it your “human right” to stop paying them? Where do you draw the line with what a “human right” is?
Think about it this way: both sides have the right to freely negotiate a contract, and then decide whether or not to enter into it. The CEO can't prevent the workers from talking to each other and figuring out what they think a fair contract would be, and the workers can't prevent the CEO from talking to other CEOs for the same reason. The specific human right is usually referred to as "freedom of association". You c…
By the same token, the company’s management is free to fight union creation, by sharing anti-union messages. Freedom of speech and assembly on both sides.