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

131–140 of 632 posts

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

#131

Post by vertex-four »

soperj wrote: post #112
balabaster wrote: post #95

Full disclosure: I've always been anti-union for my own personal approach to life. I do see the value in unions, I've just always, to this point, been a go-it-alone-and-fight-my-own-battles kind of person. I don't want to be beholden to a union or their rules any more than I want to be beholden to an employer beyond my contractual obligations for which I'm paid. That said, people should take note of what happened whe…

So they were both reduced hours and beholden to their jobs with no time off?

When you’re paid minimum wage in the US, and you’re not permitted to perform a full-time job, you probably have to hold down multiple jobs; you probably also don’t get things like healthcare from any of them.

Zero hours contracts in theory mean you can refuse work (at least that’s how it works in the U.K.), but obviously you’re going to be fired for doing so, so you’re essentially constantly on call for both/all your jobs.

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

#132

Post by damnyou »

marcinzm wrote: post #85
Dirlewanger wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unbelievable. This is petty shit you'd expect from 100+ years ago when companies were breaking strikes by killing people. Might as well rename this country to the Corporate States of America. No level of government has any backbone against the private sector.

Yes changing the timing of some traffic lights is exactly the same as killing people.

Well, for its union busting efforts Amazon has been using spies from the literal, actual Pinkerton: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/amazon-...

Yes, it's the same Pinkerton that did this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike

edit: Ah, I've been shadow banned. I probably offended the mods when I pointed out how much of a racist Scott Siskind was.

Hey dang, you, by virtue of wanting to keep the community on this site over eradicating white supremacism from here — you are a white supremacist.

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

#133

Post by _jal »

fxtentacle wrote: post #121
fireball_blaze wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also reference Amazon's "Do it without dues" site: https://www.doitwithoutdues.com/

Wow, just wow. "Don’t buy that dinner, don’t buy those school supplies, don’t buy those gifts because you won’t have that almost $500 you paid in dues." It seems Amazon's main argument for why people shouldn't join a union is that Amazon's wages are so low that they cannot financially afford to. That's almost like saying "You're too poor to fight for your rights. Know your place."

> "You're too poor to fight for your rights. Know your place."

Well, yes. The goal of an antiunion campaign is the demoralization/ disempowerment of the workforce.

Notice also the recent push for "experimental polities", AKA company towns.

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

#134

Post by sudosysgen »

mc32 wrote: post #65
rtpg wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't your boss telling you how to do that though. The direct power imbalance is pretty different, I think.

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.

Unions are at least nominally directly elected by their constituents and beholden to them, which is why they are protected when engaging in politics.

If you think they do not represent them, then maybe the solution is to develop better union structures that are more democratic and representative.

But by and large, teachers do not support the Libertarian party and instead favour the Democratic party, quite heavily in fact. So why is it wrong that their alignment follows their base?

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

#135

Post by bjoli »

chasd00 wrote: post #103
phone8675309 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Now, I am not very up to date on statistics, but unionised workers have traditionally earned about 10% more than non-uniomized ones in the US since at least the 80s. The article mentions 11%, which seems in line with what I know since before.

I doubt any union would charge anywhere near that much.

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

#136

Post by JPKab »

balabaster wrote: post #95

Full disclosure: I've always been anti-union for my own personal approach to life. I do see the value in unions, I've just always, to this point, been a go-it-alone-and-fight-my-own-battles kind of person. I don't want to be beholden to a union or their rules any more than I want to be beholden to an employer beyond my contractual obligations for which I'm paid. That said, people should take note of what happened whe…

Something that adds insult to injury is the amount of moral posturing Amazon engages in when it comes to social justice issues.

What could be a bigger social justice issue than paying working class people proper wages and benefits? It just screams out to me how hollow and PR driven their support of social justice organizations and initiatives is. And more importantly, the silence from these same social justice initiatives is deafening.

I strongly suspect that paying working class employees more money would have a far higher positive impact on black communities than donating money to activist organizations.

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

#137

Post by SllX »

chrisseaton wrote: post #84
SllX wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is weird. The literal purpose of a corporation in all its varieties, for profit, non-profit, co-op, S Corp, C Corp etc. is to pool the resources of its owners and serve their interests. Unions are just another type of corporation.

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.

I don’t disagree.

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

#138

Post by tablespoon »

sodality2 wrote: post #122
fireball_blaze wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also reference Amazon's "Do it without dues" site: https://www.doitwithoutdues.com/

I love this: "Make your voice heard! VOTE NOW AND VOTE NO." Those posters are all over the warehouses and it really feels like some 1984-esque parody.

> I love this: "Make your voice heard! VOTE NOW AND VOTE NO." Those posters are all over the warehouses and it really feels like some 1984-esque parody.

Make your voice heard! Tell Big Brother you love him!

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

#139

Post by sudosysgen »

dragonwriter wrote: post #38
minikites wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every corporation has contempt for its workforce, it's why labor unions are so necessary.

Nearly every corporation has naked contempt for its “human resources”, that's why it calls them, and the department responsible for minimizing the cost of exploiting them, “human resources”.

Indeed. It's a bit sad how us human resources often balk at accepting this fact.

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

#140

Post by _jal »

chrisseaton wrote: post #128
HarryHirsch wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Common experience is that performance reviews are bullshit and that scores are determined by warm fuzzies and management's political needs. Rachel has story after story. If you are politically astute, by all means don't join the union, but all this talk about "results" doesn't sound as if you are.

Do you not have the imagination to think of any situation where the majority of workers may want something that's not in your interests? For example you morally support allowing new people to enter your field but the union is mostly comprised of more established people and they vote for credentialism to restrict supply. Probably I'm very aligned with my employer on wanting to lower barriers to entry for the field!

> Do you not have the imagination

Why the rudeness?

I'd also note that you appear to demand 100% alignment with your ethics from unions in return for your support ("think of any situation"), but are fine with being somewhat aligned with your employer.

You seem to already have chosen a tribal affiliation.

Post reply on HN