Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon Warehouse Workers to Decide Whether to Form Company's First U.S. Union

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 378 posts

Re: Amazon Warehouse Workers to Decide Whether to Form Company's First U.S. Union

#111

Post by nicoburns »

koolba wrote: post #105
pwinnski wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many/most supporters of unions argue that police should not be able to form or join unions. "Cops are not workers" is a common phrase I've seen.

I take it a step further and reject all public sector unions. Teachers, cops, firemen, dog catchers, you name it. There’s just too many perverse incentives for politicians to give in to union demands in exchange for buying votes. Unlike the private sector, the ones agreeing to the union demands care little about the long term costs associated since they’re not the ones paying them.

> There’s just too many perverse incentives for politicians to give in to union demands in exchange for buying votes

If politicians were looking to maximise votes, wouldn't they target parents not teachers: there's a lot more parents than teachers.

Re: Amazon Warehouse Workers to Decide Whether to Form Company's First U.S. Union

#112

Post by frakkingcylons »

underseacables wrote: post #85
jariel wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unions are like corporations - there is good and bad, benefits and drawbacks. One thing I've noticed, is that where 'new unions' are forming, there is' probably a good reason for it.

There is no good reason for it. Employees at top companies are forming unions because they think that will allow them to say whatever they want on the job, and if Google says no don’t talk about politics at work it creates tension and conflict, they will say sorry where are union you have to listen to us now. It’s spoiled, overpaid techies upset they can’t use work time to preach political and social issues.

There are many people working at Google that are not full time employees. They are treated completely differently when it comes to their pay, sick leave, vacation, or even just certainty that they will have a job when their contract expires. The benefits for them from being unionized are a lot more important than you’re making them out to be.

Re: Amazon Warehouse Workers to Decide Whether to Form Company's First U.S. Union

#113

Post by BitwiseFool »

j_walter wrote: post #19
legitster wrote: post #9

I have to imagine unions have a bit of an uphill battle right now, they took some major black eyes in 2020: - Police unions openly declaring war on their own citizens - Teachers unions causing general chaos in school reopening plans I understand that public sector unions are a different beast, but purely from an optics perspective I have to imagine public sentiment for unions can't be very high right now.

I've never fully understood public unions to be honest. Unions used to be the best way to protect yourself from a bad employer...but the employer is the government (and to some extent the people). It used to be that public sector workers made less in exchange for better benefits, but in the last few years the war was waged on the public to increase wages to that of "private companies". Now teachers in my state make m…

Public Sector Unions make perfect sense from a political standpoint. It accomplishes two big things - it's a massive barrier to scaling back bureaucracy and it's a boon for any politician who supports the union.

Re: Amazon Warehouse Workers to Decide Whether to Form Company's First U.S. Union

#114

Post by munk-a »

pwinnski wrote: post #62
random5634 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The propaganda unfortunately also comes from folks direct experience with unions. In the US, most unions are public sector. So folks see that Police unions may protect bad apples via union. Teachers unions may care more about teachers including bad ones then teaching kids. We had a famously terrible teacher at my school - unfirable - as kids we thought it was hilarious. As a parent now - not so cool. Non unionized sc…

Many/most supporters of unions argue that police should not be able to form or join unions. "Cops are not workers" is a common phrase I've seen.

Given that the police budget is formed by public allocation and the nature of the job I think that policy absolutely should have the ability to form unions. Being forced to work long shifts in dangerous work environments (whether dangerous to you or others) is pretty unsafe. The issue is that, whether intentionally or not, the public has bargained away some pretty valuable things over the year to the union including employment record availability and retention requirements.

That union needs some serious reform and it isn't going to come from the inside, but there are some really good reasons for police to have good bargaining power.

Honestly, this probably all comes back to the US massively underfunding public services as a general rule - if the policing budget had been slashed like the education budget regularly is then we'd have nothing but vigilantes in the police force.

Re: Amazon Warehouse Workers to Decide Whether to Form Company's First U.S. Union

#115

Post by wrsh07 »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #97
jariel wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unions are like corporations - there is good and bad, benefits and drawbacks. One thing I've noticed, is that where 'new unions' are forming, there is' probably a good reason for it.

I tend to agree, but the flipside is that we need trust the workers' judgment when a new union doesn't form. I see a troubling tendency among union organizers to assume that anyone who's thinking clearly would want to be in a union - if a unionization vote fails, that can only mean the company must have tricked or bullied people into casting the wrong vote.

Please keep in mind that sometimes employees are punished for considering unionization, so it's possible that them not unionizing is a reaction to that.

Assuming no external pressure, though, I absolutely agree: if workers don't see the benefit in unionizing, they should not unionize.

(Of course, I would also like to see them able to unionize if they do see benefit from it)

Re: Amazon Warehouse Workers to Decide Whether to Form Company's First U.S. Union

#116

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

edent wrote: post #74
6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #26

I asked this in the google union thread, but was too late to the party to get any answers. Copy pasting it here: Everybody here seems to agree that unions have the potential to do good or bad in every thread on it. The next logical step to me is that there needs to be a selection mechanism in place. For companies, the selection mechanism is competition. If someone else does better, the consumer or worker can choose s…

This is how it works in the UK. I have a choice of unions in my workplace. Some are targeted more at one job sector than another - but all of them will gladly take my (cheap!) subscription. I get a vote in the union's policies. Employers can't require you to be a member of a specific union - or any union at all. You ccany join at any time - or leave whenever you want. What does it take? Just join a union and get othe…

I'm curious how that works with regards to your contract. Do you get to pick a different contract, with different terms, benefits, etc., depending on which union you join, or are contract terms not negotiated directly by your union in the UK?

Re: Amazon Warehouse Workers to Decide Whether to Form Company's First U.S. Union

#117

Post by grumple »

stretchcat wrote: post #68
Frondo wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just one comment on this: > Teachers unions may care more about teachers ... That's precisely the point of a union. It's an organization to protect its members. It's the purpose of the school system overall, including principals, school boards, and so on, to care about teaching kids.

Maybe if student unions weren't a complete joke, the situation would improve. As it stands, teachers unions keep terrible teachers employed, against the interest of the students, while the students have no real representation or organization to provide balance by looking after student interests. My mother was a middleschool teacher when I was in highschool, and drove me to highschool in the morning. Because she was a…

> teachers unions keep terrible teachers employed

Are there a bunch of would-be teachers clamoring for those jobs?

I think the lack of desirability is what keeps terrible teachers employed. There also aren't great ways to measure how good someone is at teaching.

Re: Amazon Warehouse Workers to Decide Whether to Form Company's First U.S. Union

#118

Post by midasuni »

Aunche wrote: post #69
Frondo wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just one comment on this: > Teachers unions may care more about teachers ... That's precisely the point of a union. It's an organization to protect its members. It's the purpose of the school system overall, including principals, school boards, and so on, to care about teaching kids.

Teachers and police officers are public servants. If they want to bargain, they should be negotiating with the public, not government officials. Otherwise, it's just collusion.

The government are the public’s representatives.

Or should a developer negotiate with a shareholder for a bonus?

Re: Amazon Warehouse Workers to Decide Whether to Form Company's First U.S. Union

#119

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

wrsh07 wrote: post #115
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tend to agree, but the flipside is that we need trust the workers' judgment when a new union doesn't form. I see a troubling tendency among union organizers to assume that anyone who's thinking clearly would want to be in a union - if a unionization vote fails, that can only mean the company must have tricked or bullied people into casting the wrong vote.

Please keep in mind that sometimes employees are punished for considering unionization, so it's possible that them not unionizing is a reaction to that. Assuming no external pressure, though, I absolutely agree: if workers don't see the benefit in unionizing, they should not unionize. (Of course, I would also like to see them able to unionize if they do see benefit from it)

True, and I definitely don't mean to deny the existence of illegitimate union-busting efforts.

Re: Amazon Warehouse Workers to Decide Whether to Form Company's First U.S. Union

#120

Post by munk-a »

_Qeomash_ wrote: post #109
pwinnski wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many/most supporters of unions argue that police should not be able to form or join unions. "Cops are not workers" is a common phrase I've seen.

I'd say they are allowed to have unions, local governments just need to be able to exert meaningful oversight even with the unions.

Well I think the issue is that the policing unions form state and national agreements but local governments are left to negotiate on their own. The DOJ (or something at the national level) really needs more oversight when it comes to policing so that we can have collectivized bargaining on both sides. Local councils can't realistically stand up to police unions in a meaningful way since the national charter can drop a ton of money on elections to get troublesome members ousted... Again, another side effect of terrible election finance laws.
Post reply on HN