Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds • Hacker News Board

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#391

Post by burnished » Tue, Apr 06, 2021, 3:08 PM UTC

throwawaysea wrote: post #267

burnished wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? It sounds like you are implying that you need your employers permission to speak your mind, broadly, on any topic?

I'm not necessarily saying that's how it should be, but I am observing that this is how it is in practice. Otherwise what do you make of companies regularly firing people for saying something on social media or on their own time? For example Disney+ fired Gina Carano for holding certain political positions and expressing them online. It seems like left-leaning activists want it both ways - protection for their own ac…

'protection for moderates or conservative' I see this opined frequently, but what specific views are in need of protection here? Real question because it usually seems like a smoke screen for troubling or racist views.

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#392

Post by NoSorryCannot » Tue, Apr 06, 2021, 3:47 PM UTC

mancerayder wrote: post #384

knowaveragejoe wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people think the promotion of diversity is part of some nefarious global plot?

That's misinformed and presumptuous. Study the working class movements from the mid 19th century to the 1970s. Look at their coalitions and demands. Study the woke movement of the 2015-2021. One was pushing for collective unity and demanding concrete rights, including healthcare, working hour limits and unionization rights. The other wants to fire racists and change language. Which would you prefer if you were a corp…

This is an extremely reductive and uncharitable take on the conversations being had right now and calling it the "woke movement" shows you know what you're doing.

"Concrete" things like healthcare reform, voting reform, policing reform, tax reform, immigration reform, and women's rights have been front and center. You'd have to be looking through a very distorted lens to not see it.

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#393

Post by mancerayder » Tue, Apr 06, 2021, 5:17 PM UTC

NoSorryCannot wrote: post #392

mancerayder wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's misinformed and presumptuous. Study the working class movements from the mid 19th century to the 1970s. Look at their coalitions and demands. Study the woke movement of the 2015-2021. One was pushing for collective unity and demanding concrete rights, including healthcare, working hour limits and unionization rights. The other wants to fire racists and change language. Which would you prefer if you were a corp…

This is an extremely reductive and uncharitable take on the conversations being had right now and calling it the "woke movement" shows you know what you're doing. "Concrete" things like healthcare reform, voting reform, policing reform, tax reform, immigration reform, and women's rights have been front and center. You'd have to be looking through a very distorted lens to not see it.

[flagged]

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#394

Post by sreque » Tue, Apr 06, 2021, 7:06 PM UTC

GavinMcG wrote: post #252

sreque wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NLRB are appointed by the president and can behave with incredible political bias: https://republicans-oversight.house.gov/release/oversight-re... The reach of the executive branch has extended far beyond what is healthy for the nation of the United States.

Sure, but they're still constrained by the Courts of Appeal and the Supreme Court. And that bias would show up in the final decision: merely having a letter saying the NLRB will take up the case is multiple steps removed from the political appointment concerns.

Tell that to Boeing: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/10/business/labor-board-drop...

I'm pretty sure no one wants to start a dispute almost guaranteed 0-1 before an appeals court that may or may not be sympathetic to your plight.

Even in Boeing's case, which was incredibly high-profile, they decided on an a very expensive settlement rather than fight the case.

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#395

Post by Rule35 » Tue, Apr 06, 2021, 7:10 PM UTC

jakelazaroff wrote: post #383

Rule35 wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you try to catch a serial killer today? If not you helped kill their victim. Now either explain the limit to that logic or turn yourself in to the police.

The limit to the logic is that it only applies where you are forced to choose between zero sum options.

Yeah, like deciding between spending your limited time on here or hunting a serial killer. Zero sum, son.

You don't seem to have realized that you aren't the first group to use these arguments and tactics, or how badly they fail. Sadly only after exacting great societal consequences though.

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#396

Post by Rule35 » Tue, Apr 06, 2021, 7:15 PM UTC

jakelazaroff wrote: post #385

Rule35 wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because I don't lie about peeing in a bottle at my job and make trouble. But if there was a union there'd be a never ending parade of shit I'd have to watch out for. Like having to pretend that we have to piss in bottles rather than using the washroom or else having my stuff vandalized and maybe being beaten in the parking lot. Unions use lies and violence to get their way, been there, had enough of that. What wa…

For the record, Amazon has admitted the peeing in bottles story was true: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/04/amazon-admits-it...

No, and this is more union deception. You're trying to conflate employees doing warehouse work (where they have bathrooms) with contract drivers who choose to pee in bottles. Everyone knows the warehouse pee story is made up or you'd stop grasping at straws.

Why, oh why, must socialists lie?

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#397

Post by Rule35 » Tue, Apr 06, 2021, 7:20 PM UTC

aranelsurion wrote: post #376

Rule35 wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because I don't lie about peeing in a bottle at my job and make trouble. But if there was a union there'd be a never ending parade of shit I'd have to watch out for. Like having to pretend that we have to piss in bottles rather than using the washroom or else having my stuff vandalized and maybe being beaten in the parking lot. Unions use lies and violence to get their way, been there, had enough of that. What wa…

Isn't it a bit of a stretch to build the definition of what a union is by using anecdotes as building blocks? One could argue the same for pretty much any other organized group (companies, governments, ...) yet we don't define their function by individual actions. In summary: People don't usually form unions to beat others in parking lots, you know.

Right, they don't form unions to beat people. But pretty much every union involves implicit threats of being beaten in the parking lot. Certainly having your stuff stolen from your locker and broken or left in the toilet. As long as there are picket lines people will hit those trying to cross them. Talk to a unionist and see, they're very free with these stories.

It's not the goal but when you've convinced yourself you're fighting the good fight I guess you take the gloves off.

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#398

Post by robocat » Tue, Apr 06, 2021, 7:43 PM UTC

lmm wrote: post #355

robocat wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rubbish. Your assumption is that unions are always a benefit to their members. I have seen enough actions by unions where the outcomes were detrimental to their members for me to believe that some unions are a net negative for their members. Someone can choose to not belong to a union because they are a good person that just believes that a union is bad for everyone. Edit: Disclaimer: I am not stating that I think un…

Much like democratic government, people get the unions they deserve. Empowering your colleagues is an ethical act, and if they use that power to do things that you paternalistically think are against their own interests, then that's proof that the power is genuinely theirs.

I think that is a misunderstanding of where the power of “democracy” comes from.

I think voting mostly works in democracies by being able to vote a party out after the government has abused us against our wishes and their promises.

In a first-past-the-post system, you often get to chose between two evils... Imagine you were forced to pick a partner for 3 years, one which you suspect will rape you and the other you think will beat you, and you must pick one or the other...

And that is ignoring the fact that usually nearly 50% of the people that voted, voted against the party they got. It is ridiculous to think that the ~50% that voted against a party deserve what they get.

That said, I like this version by H.L. Mencken better: "People deserve the government they get, and they deserve to get it good and hard."

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#399

Post by thomastjeffery » Tue, Apr 06, 2021, 7:52 PM UTC

Rule35 wrote: post #264

thomastjeffery wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parent's point was that by working for a company without supporting a union, you are giving that company leverage against the union. That is where the neutrality is lost.

I reject your absolutist ideology. If it's a forced choice of with your or against you, then you've asked for against. Edit: With them or they'll do anything from downvote you to set your car on fire. This is why people don't believe you, or support you. Look at the modern intellectual arguing the equivalent of Wickard v Filburn. Anti-union would be going out of my way to lobby my government to forbid unions. Neutral…

Here's the point you are missing:

Neutrality can only be achieved by refusing to support both the union and the company.

If you are working for the company without joining the union, then you are supporting the company's anti-union efforts.

Remember, no one is forced to join a company just like no one is forced to join a union.

Re: Amazon illegally fired activist workers, Labor Board finds

#400

Post by quintdamage » Tue, Apr 06, 2021, 8:30 PM UTC

htnsao wrote: post #360

quintdamage wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think yall misunderstood my comment. I'm not maligning anyone or complaining about any stereotypes, it's a reality that men are more pro-business policies than women in the West. Personally I think that Amazon is getting what's coming to them for their labor practices. My point was that I expected a significantly more conservative, Wall Street Journal-y response than those I have been seeing so far.

Absolutely. I put men in quotes because the mostly gay crowd here are more like women.

Looks like I chose the wrong person to reply to. Does it ever feel sour that people that think like you are an ever decreasing minority in the greatest country on earth? Reflect on that.