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

611–620 of 632 posts

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

#611

Post by secfirstmd »

mmmBacon wrote: post #504
secfirstmd wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pinkerton are the corporate security company of choice for a lot of organisations...including Facebook

Perhaps you are unaware that the Pinkertons have a long history of union busting behavior. The most infamous being their involvement in the 1892 Homestead Steel Strike. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike

Thanks I've spent more than a decade working with civil society groups including union organising. The comment was made to highlight that Pinkerton are working with Facebook (amongst others) thus Facebook may also be concerned about union organising. Esp with Pinkertons past record.

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

#612

Post by secfirstmd »

eyelidlessness wrote: post #556
secfirstmd wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pinkerton are the corporate security company of choice for a lot of organisations...including Facebook

In case you’re not aware, Pinkerton was a prominent security company which gained a reputation for literally murdering labor organizers. For context.

Thanks I've spent more than a decade working with civil society groups including labour organising ones. The comment was made to highlight that Pinkerton are working with Facebook (amongst others) thus Facebook may also be concerned about union organising. Esp with Pinkertons past record.

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

#613

Post by doggodaddo78 »

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".

No, not pro-Pinkerton; not appreciating the historical infamy of the Pinkerton's. They are like lobbyists - true scum: tools of the rich harming people for money.

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

#614

Post by wizzwizz4 »

SilasX wrote: post #602
wizzwizz4 wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you didn't understand because you're focusing on a bit that the original comment didn't emphasise. The complaint is not about six pages of instructions. The complaint is about combining education with manipulation. Imagine a handy guide from your bank that included instructions for how to wire money to its author.

Yes, I suggested that as a meaning of what the OP meant, very early on, and it was rejected. Second paragraph of response: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26265969

Could you explain that comment of yours, please? I don't understand how it's saying what you claim it's saying.

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

#615

Post by dang »

SilasX wrote: post #602
wizzwizz4 wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you didn't understand because you're focusing on a bit that the original comment didn't emphasise. The complaint is not about six pages of instructions. The complaint is about combining education with manipulation. Imagine a handy guide from your bank that included instructions for how to wire money to its author.

Yes, I suggested that as a meaning of what the OP meant, very early on, and it was rejected. Second paragraph of response: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26265969

Can you please stop? I know these tit-for-tat exchanges are hard to pull away from but they're exceptionally tedious, and not what HN is supposed to be for.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

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

#616

Post by dang »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #614
SilasX wrote: post #602

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I suggested that as a meaning of what the OP meant, very early on, and it was rejected. Second paragraph of response: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26265969

Could you explain that comment of yours, please? I don't understand how it's saying what you claim it's saying.

Please stop. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26279550

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

#617

Post by dang »

bhfasdhjgdgsuyv wrote: post #569
SilasX wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You're certainly making an effort to be an obtuse loser.

We've banned this account for breaking the site guidelines. Can you please not create accounts to do that with? We're trying for something different here.

Also, could you please not create accounts for every few comments you post? We tend to ban those also. This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

You needn't use your real name, of course, but for HN to be a community, users need some identity for other users to relate to. Otherwise we may as well have no usernames and no community, and that would be a different kind of forum. https://hn.algolia.com/?query=community%20identity%20by:dang...

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

#618

Post by doggodaddo78 »

secfirstmd wrote: post #610
kd0amg wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder why multiple people read his comment as pro Pinkertons (pro AMZN etc.) Because "this is common practice" is often used as an argument that "this is reasonable."

The comment was made to highlight that Pinkerton are working with Facebook (amongst others) thus Facebook may also be concerned about union organising. So watch out if you are trying. Esp with Pinkertons past record.

Yes, exactly.

Interestingly: McDonald's has their own internal surveillance apparatus that functions much like their own Pinkerton's.

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

#619

Post by doggodaddo78 »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #527
tharkun__ wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

Ugh. Yes, that sucks. Benefit of the doubt, patience/curiosity to understand, and fair view are rare as supermodels with PhD's flying jet aircraft these days.

Up/down vote I think is too ambiguous: there ought to be an agree/disagree metric and a relevant-interesting/irrelevant-uninteresting one too. Maybe even get rid of displayed karma and simply vote on multiple properties (insightful, agreed, brave, well-reasoned, informative, primary source anecdote)

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

#620

Post by phabora »

Grimm1 wrote: post #429
phabora wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High-performers (read: well-payed workers) like to complain about the nefarious corrupting influence of unions but seldom consider the case that the high-performers (read: upper-middle class) might have a vested interest in the corrupt status quo where the majority of workers facilitate their high-performing (read: privileged) lifestyles.

I mean all the anecdotes I have come from electricians and county paid groundskeepers and who also happen to be my close friends so I'd have to say your assertion if not false in totality is false in this case for certain. Edit: Oh and a general contractor or two.

My mistake. I thought you were upper-middle class.
Post reply on HN