Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees • Hacker News Board

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

#521

Post by pseudalopex » Fri, Feb 26, 2021, 1:00 AM UTC

Macha wrote: post #457

Something I don't understand about US unions I often see mandatory dues being brought up as arguments against unions in the US. I've never heard of that practice here, so I looked and it is in fact illegal here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_shop#Council_of_Europe based on the freedom of association (which also covers freedom of _not_ associating). There's also no requirement for employers to negotiate or reco…

Voting to unionize means the employer is required to negotiate with the union. And strikers have rights during and after strikes.

US labor law doesn't recognize members only unions. Employers don't have to negotiate with them. They have less incentive to negotiate because the outcome isn't binding. Strikers are just AWOL. And the prevailing legal opinion seems to be a union can't represent more than 50% but less than 100% of a bargaining unit.

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

#522

Post by htnsao » Fri, Feb 26, 2021, 1:00 AM UTC

dillondoyle wrote: post #256

There are a couple mentions but no top comments: Amazon has installed a mailbox at their facility, this mail piece specifically says to use it. AND this mail piece says 'BE DONE by 3/1' when workers have until the end of the month to vote (context: amazon must stop anti-union mandatory meetings etc during voting). This could be a legal violation & is a big deal. I think at a minimum breaks the spirit of the NLRB mail…

Having actually worked a union job once, I'll say this:

Unions suck. Bezos should fire them all and hire people that want to work harder to make more money. And try to replace each whiner with a robot.

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

#523

Post by s1artibartfast » Fri, Feb 26, 2021, 1:04 AM UTC

pseudalopex wrote: post #486

s1artibartfast wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for the correction, I misremembered the definitions 27 states are "right-to-work" states [1] The remaining 23 allow "Union Security Agreements" between employers and unions where all employees are required to be members. [2] The 23 states without right-to-work allow agency fees. However, these 23 states also allow "union shops", where non-membership is not an option, so everyone can be charged for political…

Union shop is illegal federally. Some people say union shop when they mean agency shop though. The Wikipedia article says agency shop is a form of union security agreement.

Are you sure you aren't thinking of a closed shop?

My understanding is that closed shops where you need membership to apply are illegal, but union shops (post-entry closed shops) are legal in states without right-to-work.[1]

That said, I was wrong before and may be wrong again. It is really hard to understand the specifics of union law as many sources are sloppy with their terms and there are state-to-state differences?

https://www.thebalancecareers.com/what-is-an-agency-shop-vs-...

PS, I really appreciate your use of "You're confused". It is much more polite than some of the contradictions people use.

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

#524

Post by okamiueru » Fri, Feb 26, 2021, 1:04 AM UTC

htnsao wrote: post #522

dillondoyle wrote: post #256

There are a couple mentions but no top comments: Amazon has installed a mailbox at their facility, this mail piece specifically says to use it. AND this mail piece says 'BE DONE by 3/1' when workers have until the end of the month to vote (context: amazon must stop anti-union mandatory meetings etc during voting). This could be a legal violation & is a big deal. I think at a minimum breaks the spirit of the NLRB mail…

Having actually worked a union job once, I'll say this: Unions suck. Bezos should fire them all and hire people that want to work harder to make more money. And try to replace each whiner with a robot.

Care to explain or elaborate? I'm in utter confusion at every hacker news discussion that touches on unions. I live in a country that is heavily unionised. Its almost unheard of to not be in one. And, y the benefits are so prevalent, that I'm just confused reading the things I read on hacker news. It's just, weird. I have my suspicious, but I'd have to keep those to myself due to the guidelines here.

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

#525

Post by frongpik » Fri, Feb 26, 2021, 1:08 AM UTC

Someone needs to write the new version of "Moral Mazes". The original one described a noname chemical corp (DuPont?) full of execs that had sold their souls. Now someone we need something similar for Amazon.

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

#526

Post by faitswulff » Fri, Feb 26, 2021, 1:10 AM UTC

throwaway894345 wrote: post #520

faitswulff wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems revisionist. Your earlier comment specifically mentions “hyper-partisanship.”

It’s not revisionist, but I see now where the misunderstanding is. Partisanship means “commitment to an ideology”.

Interesting, that is one definition of partisanship:

> the quality or state of being partisan : strong and sometimes blind adherence to a particular party, faction, cause, or person [0]

Didn't know that, thanks.

[0]: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/partisanship

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

#527

Post by colejohnson66 » Fri, Feb 26, 2021, 1:11 AM UTC

tharkun__ wrote: post #506

doggodaddo78 wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could use to read some history books.

I wonder why multiple people read his comment as pro Pinkertons (pro AMZN etc.) I read it as "Yep and Amazon are not the only large company that use them, so watch out! If Facebook employees ever want to unionize, Pinkertons might/will be sent after them too".

People read what they want to hear. I’ve posted comments that make it clear I support stuff, but because I (essentially) argued devil’s advocate, I was downvoted. I can only assume it’s because I’m supposedly showing sympathy to the other side (even if I’m not).

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

#528

Post by SilasX » Fri, Feb 26, 2021, 1:12 AM UTC

sidlls wrote: post #505

SilasX wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All such people are so blinded by the outrage they can't take a few seconds to make clear what they're actually outraged about in way that can convince others to join them? Yeah, sounds about right.

Have you considered that you simply aren't understanding the reasons, which are quite clear and unambiguous to a relatively large population? That is, maybe the issue here is your difficulty understanding, rather than anybody else's ability to explain.

Yeah, I did, that's why I asked the follow-up questions that zeroed in on what my confusion is. No one's resolved it. They gave different reasons it would be bad for Amazon to do this, but none that made any sense of OP's remark.

At this point, much as I try to be charitable, I feel like I'm the only one making a serious effort to understand so no, I can't conclude the problem is on my end.

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

#529

Post by SilasX » Fri, Feb 26, 2021, 1:14 AM UTC

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #460

SilasX wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I didn’t get any coherent explanation of what the OP was objecting to, after offering charitable interpretations that were rejected. Edit: I did get some completely separate, independent arguments, if that’s what you mean, but I’m saying I got no explanation of the original comment.

The original comment (at least, I think I went far enough up-thread) said that teaching somebody how to vote and to vote in your favour , when you have power over them, is sleazy.

This is the original comment:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26263369

There were others that gave different reasons, but none that made any sense of the "OMG six pages of instructions! Horrible!"

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

#530

Post by colejohnson66 » Fri, Feb 26, 2021, 1:16 AM UTC

okamiueru wrote: post #524

htnsao wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having actually worked a union job once, I'll say this: Unions suck. Bezos should fire them all and hire people that want to work harder to make more money. And try to replace each whiner with a robot.

Care to explain or elaborate? I'm in utter confusion at every hacker news discussion that touches on unions. I live in a country that is heavily unionised. Its almost unheard of to not be in one. And, y the benefits are so prevalent, that I'm just confused reading the things I read on hacker news. It's just, weird. I have my suspicious, but I'd have to keep those to myself due to the guidelines here.

Key word in your comment: “different country.” Unions in the US tend to have an image of bureaucracy and not actually helping. For example, I worked at a union grocery store job a few years back and the union did jack squat for quite a lot of us. No benefits, minimum wage (well, 10¢ or so over), etc.

My experience is obviously not representative of unions as a whole, but experiences such as these do taint one’s view of them in a bad way. Especially if they’re your first experience.