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

Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 416 posts

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#11

Post by monocasa »

merpnderp wrote: post #5

I'm clicking through all the links in this article and can't find a single bit from Amazon's point of view. But my hazy memory says Amazon's story is they were fired because they were sending mass emails through the internal Amazon email system trying to unionize and wouldn't quit and use some other means of communication even after being counseled. You'd expect the NYT's to give both side's at a minimum, or is Amazo…

Apparently the NLRB didn't think the specifics of Amazon's explanation for why they were fired was compelling. Why should the NYT then?

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#12

Post by throwawayfire »

merpnderp wrote: post #5

I'm clicking through all the links in this article and can't find a single bit from Amazon's point of view. But my hazy memory says Amazon's story is they were fired because they were sending mass emails through the internal Amazon email system trying to unionize and wouldn't quit and use some other means of communication even after being counseled. You'd expect the NYT's to give both side's at a minimum, or is Amazo…

It would be unsurprising to me if Amazon had buried this claim and didn't want it to be repeated, because in my opinion that would be clear evidence that they were breaking labor laws.

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#14

Post by tpush »

merpnderp wrote: post #5

I'm clicking through all the links in this article and can't find a single bit from Amazon's point of view. But my hazy memory says Amazon's story is they were fired because they were sending mass emails through the internal Amazon email system trying to unionize and wouldn't quit and use some other means of communication even after being counseled. You'd expect the NYT's to give both side's at a minimum, or is Amazo…

???

Amazon's POV is explained directly in the article. There's also this link [0] from the article elaborating on the firing.

[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/01/02/amazon-...

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#15

Post by jessaustin »

merpnderp wrote: post #5

I'm clicking through all the links in this article and can't find a single bit from Amazon's point of view. But my hazy memory says Amazon's story is they were fired because they were sending mass emails through the internal Amazon email system trying to unionize and wouldn't quit and use some other means of communication even after being counseled. You'd expect the NYT's to give both side's at a minimum, or is Amazo…

I hope they have better luck with WaPo!

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#16

Post by jessaustin »

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #10
merpnderp wrote: post #5

I'm clicking through all the links in this article and can't find a single bit from Amazon's point of view. But my hazy memory says Amazon's story is they were fired because they were sending mass emails through the internal Amazon email system trying to unionize and wouldn't quit and use some other means of communication even after being counseled. You'd expect the NYT's to give both side's at a minimum, or is Amazo…

You'd expect the NYT's to give both side's at a minimum, or is Amazon a cartoon villain ran by a duck who swims in a silo of gold coins? News doesn't do that anymore, but more importantly, Scrooge McDuck is not a villain.

We wouldn't want children to get the wrong idea about rich people!

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#17

Post by bhupy »

monocasa wrote: post #11
merpnderp wrote: post #5

I'm clicking through all the links in this article and can't find a single bit from Amazon's point of view. But my hazy memory says Amazon's story is they were fired because they were sending mass emails through the internal Amazon email system trying to unionize and wouldn't quit and use some other means of communication even after being counseled. You'd expect the NYT's to give both side's at a minimum, or is Amazo…

Apparently the NLRB didn't think the specifics of Amazon's explanation for why they were fired was compelling. Why should the NYT then?

Because the NLRB isn't some opaque body; it's a public body accountable to voters, and as a voter it's impossible to know if their explanation is valid if the press doesn't accurately and fully report on why a particular decision was made.

Maybe after presenting all sides of the decision, an NYT reader might agree that the NLRB's decision was correct/valid; but with the way the article is written, it's impossible for that to happen.

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#18

Post by merpnderp »

monocasa wrote: post #11
merpnderp wrote: post #5

I'm clicking through all the links in this article and can't find a single bit from Amazon's point of view. But my hazy memory says Amazon's story is they were fired because they were sending mass emails through the internal Amazon email system trying to unionize and wouldn't quit and use some other means of communication even after being counseled. You'd expect the NYT's to give both side's at a minimum, or is Amazo…

Apparently the NLRB didn't think the specifics of Amazon's explanation for why they were fired was compelling. Why should the NYT then?

So it's your point of view that the NYT's shouldn't be doing journalism, but advocacy? Readers don't get to make up their minds, but get spoon fed just what they need to know as determined by their betters? It's a brave new world you're creating.

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#19

Post by kop316 »

vsareto wrote: post #4
blinding-streak wrote: post #3

The original site seems to be offline now, but for reference, Amazon's anti-union propaganda website: https://web.archive.org/web/20210301090641/https://www.doitw...

>We’ve got you covered* >*Applies to regular full-time employees. >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. WHY NOT save the money and get the books, gifts & things you want? I've seen better propaganda for EVE Online and most people are doing that as a joke

I am actually curious to see the EVE Online propaganda. Do you have any links?

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#20

Post by ethbr0 »

vsareto wrote: post #4
blinding-streak wrote: post #3

The original site seems to be offline now, but for reference, Amazon's anti-union propaganda website: https://web.archive.org/web/20210301090641/https://www.doitw...

>We’ve got you covered* >*Applies to regular full-time employees. >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. WHY NOT save the money and get the books, gifts & things you want? I've seen better propaganda for EVE Online and most people are doing that as a joke

Nobody ever accused HR of being overburdened with creativity.
Post reply on HN