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

Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 632 posts

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#101

Post by ahelwer »

pitaj wrote: post #91
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I felt this was about Uber being told they had to treat drivers like employees in California too, and look how that turned out: A dystopian rule that lawmakers can't overturn to enable worker exploitation.

Classifying gig workers as employees was a terrible idea. Not to mention the law that did so had so many exclusions it was ridiculous. Generally, we should be moving away from linking health insurance and other benefits to employment.

Have you taken a look at a public health insurance exchange recently? Buying your own health insurance is a terrible deal. I'm self-employed so have had to deal with this myself. Nothing solidifies deep disdain for any politician who doesn't support Medicare for All faster than looking at that webpage of health insurance plans.

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#102

Post by chrisseaton »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #99
chrisseaton wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unions serve the interests of the people with power in the union. If those interests don't align with yours, the union may be working against you and you may not want to get involved.

On the other hand, the employer never ever serves your interest. Rachel has a something to say about performance reviews recently: https://rachelbythebay.com/w/2021/02/19/perf/

> On the other hand, the employer never ever serves your interest.

Their interests may align to mine even if they're doing it for their own benefit. And if the union's interests don't align to mine, then I'm better off without the union and with the employer.

I don't think that's a hypothetical scenario, either.

For example if the union wants to pay by seniority and the employer wants to pay by results, and I have low seniority but good results, who am I better aligned with?

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#103

Post by chasd00 »

phone8675309 wrote: post #18
falcolas wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why pay your employees when you can pay a consultant to show how to keep your employee costs low? /s

IF your company thinks spending $X on keeping you from unionizing is worth it then the benefit to you is at least ($X+1)/$num_workers to unionize.

do you have any idea how big the num_workers number is? I'd wager for the average employee the benefit will be neagative, as in paycheck - union dues. The real benefit goes to the union bosses as num_workers * union_dues.

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#104

Post by malf »

nabla9 wrote: post #42
Zealotux wrote: post #10

From a non-US point of view, this whole anti-union strategy from Amazon is somehow hilarious to witness on top of being sad. This kind of propaganda feels like its coming from another age, or dimension.

The sadness is build into the US labor laws. The US has enterprise level bargaining (as does UK). In enterprise bargaining anything that helps workers hurts enterprises against their nonunionized competition. It's a bad system to have as a main method. Most other countries have versions of sectoral bargaining system, sometimes with some national and enterprise level aspects. Once you understand the difference, it's e…

That explains a lot. Thanks!

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#105

Post by mc32 »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #96
mc32 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like some unions tell their members to vote for this or that party? I’m still waiting for the Teachers’ Union to endorse the Libertarian party one day soon -I’m sure it’s gonna happen.

Why would the TU endorse the Libertarian Party when the LP has done exactly zero for teachers, and has never said or done anything to imply it has any interest whatsoever in the lives of teachers? It's a very revealing tell that this is even being asked. Generally, why do Libertarians seem to act as if Rest of World owes them, but relationships are solely for their personal benefit with no reciprocity of any kind?

It’s tongue in cheek. We know the TU isn’t shy about which party they want their members to vote for.

I’m also not surprised how Amazon wants their members to vote either.

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#107

Post by fireball_blaze »

sodality2 wrote: post #2

Detailed, 6 step instructions on how to open a ballot and mark no? Thanks, amazon. This is almost as scummy as asking the city to change traffic lights so union organizers have a harder time talking to workers in between shifts. https://www.al.com/business/2021/02/jefferson-county-now-say...

Also reference Amazon's "Do it without dues" site:

https://www.doitwithoutdues.com/

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#108

Post by chrisseaton »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #97
chrisseaton wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unions serve the interests of the people with power in the union. If those interests don't align with yours, the union may be working against you and you may not want to get involved.

How is this different to corporations? What would an organisation that serves your interests look like? Why don't you try to start one - and see how corporate management responds?

> Why don't you try to start one

Why should I? You can start an organisation if you want, but you'd need to argue why it's in my interest if you want me to lend what little individual power I have. And the employer can present their arguments as well, which is fine. But if you think I'm going to trust you've got my interests at heart just because you're not my employer, then you're delusional. Why should I trust you more than them?

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#109

Post by mc32 »

duxup wrote: post #69
mc32 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like some unions tell their members to vote for this or that party? I’m still waiting for the Teachers’ Union to endorse the Libertarian party one day soon -I’m sure it’s gonna happen.

I'm waiting for the Libertarian party to embrace drivers licenses ;)

It’s a very large tent party though sparse in density.

Some of us see the need for aspects of regulation and frameworks, others prefer the more idealist semi pastoralist view of the world. I’m more in the Johnson camp ;)

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#110

Post by sodality2 »

throwawaysea wrote: post #89
sodality2 wrote: post #2

Detailed, 6 step instructions on how to open a ballot and mark no? Thanks, amazon. This is almost as scummy as asking the city to change traffic lights so union organizers have a harder time talking to workers in between shifts. https://www.al.com/business/2021/02/jefferson-county-now-say...

Why is one group (union activists) allowed to take such action but the other group isn't? I am not sure I see anything "scummy" in this.

They are allowed to. That is why they did. Just as I am allowed to call them scummy for it
Post reply on HN