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

Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 1001 posts

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#51

Post by tarquinpussy »

underseacables wrote: post #41
delecti wrote: post #10

So, leaving aside why someone would or would not want to join a union, why is this a majority vote? If 49% of a workforce wants to unionize, why can't they?

Without force the unions can’t exist. It’s like a lot of things with government involvement: Unless you are forced to do it, many people, especially if money is involved, will eventually decide not to. So in order for the union to survive and have power they have to force everyone to join, everyone to pay, and everyone submit to its system whether they like it or not. What I see in this union vote is that people didn…

[flagged]

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#52

Post by bioinformatics »

Loughla wrote: post #9

I absolutely do not understand why you would vote against your own collective interest for a small amount of union dues. That is not snark, it's a real statement. I legitimately do not understand it. Can someone who works/worked one of these jobs please explain it to me? I am so confused by how lopsided this was.

I agree with you. Elections everywhere are full of people voting wrong, against their self-interests and against everything I hold dear in life. I am Abel to vote in two countries and I can see this every year.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#53

Post by raisedbyninjas »

nanna wrote: post #12
Waterluvian wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious if it's the same reason I put up with !@#$ earlier in my career: I don't have the luxury of taking risks and I'm just really not interested in upsetting my employer. You tell me there's a better world on the other side of the hill, but I'm just trying to keep my children from starving this month. I can't even begin to think about the uncertainty and risk of trying to get there. Some commentary: I think th…

In other countries not hiring someone because of their union affiliation is flat out illegal. (Thanks to union and political struggles to protect collective bargaining as a right)

Alabama is an at will employment state. Amazon doesn't need to provide any reason for employment termination. If this warehouse unionizes, Amazon may choose to relocate their warehouse. This is in a suburb of Birmingham, population over a million. So the workers probably aren't unusually desperate for work.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#55

Post by Loughla »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #25
Loughla wrote: post #9

I absolutely do not understand why you would vote against your own collective interest for a small amount of union dues. That is not snark, it's a real statement. I legitimately do not understand it. Can someone who works/worked one of these jobs please explain it to me? I am so confused by how lopsided this was.

> I absolutely do not understand why you would vote against your own collective interest The whole "voting against your own interest" is hugely paternalistic and anti-democratic. People have their own set of values and interests. As an outsider without knowledge of the people to accuse them of voting against their own interest because they did not vote the way you wanted them to is the height of arrogance.

Relax. I guess I should've said - "What I perceive as your own collective interest," although I would argue that was implied.

I didn't intend to be arrogant at all, I am legitimately confused. The two jobs that I was in a union, the union was massively beneficial to my life. That is where my perspective came from.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#56

Post by burnoutguru »

The 39% who voted yes should put their money where their mouth is and strike. This would be enough to bring that facility to its’ knees.

The inevitable retalitory measurements they will get from management will make it to the courts with a shot of setting precedent.

The high likelihood they will be treated with brutal violence by police, private security and right ring militias at the picket lines will gain public sympathy and create momentum for a nationwide, possibly international boycott of Amazon possibly a general strike in solidarity.

This is how most unions were built.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#57

Post by ransom1538 »

Loughla wrote: post #9

I absolutely do not understand why you would vote against your own collective interest for a small amount of union dues. That is not snark, it's a real statement. I legitimately do not understand it. Can someone who works/worked one of these jobs please explain it to me? I am so confused by how lopsided this was.

"I absolutely do not understand why you would vote against your own collective interest"

Union execs become a bunch of corrupt fat cats. They are terrible [1][2][3]. The union execs will go on fancy dinners with amazon execs and decide how to "make a deal". You pay dues to a bunch of fat cats (out of your horrible salary), THEN, good luck getting any kind of promotion without fat cat approval. Promotions will quickly be based on seniority. Production will soon slow then the company will decide to shut down these unproductive plants. Read about "flint michigan" to learn how awesome unions are in the US.

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/promi...

https://lrionline.com/mafiaunion-ties-still-strong/

https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ocgs/infiltrated-labor-unio...

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#58

Post by sitkack »

bena wrote: post #11
tyingq wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guess is the messaging about dues. Lots of people focused on the short term hit to their paychecks. Most of the stories reference $500/month. That does seem high. Data I can find for other unions shows somewhere between 1 to 4 percent of gross pay as typical for union dues. Assuming $15/hour, 4 percent of gross pay would be $144/month. But, if $500/month is accurate, it's 13.8% of gross pay for $15/hour workers, a…

That short term hit can have long term consequences. If I'm scraping by already, I'm not looking forward to taking another hit to an already stretched paycheck.

If that is indeed the primary motivator, that folks are literally getting paid so little that they can't afford the union dues then two things should happen

The union should wave union dues until wages rise

and ???

This seems not unlike Walmart informing employees that it is paying them so little that they qualify for Food Stamps.

Looking forward to the Amazon paper, "Pareto Optimal Employee Compensation for Maintaining Fluid Labor Markets"

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#59

Post by criddell »

bko wrote: post #44
Loughla wrote: post #9

I absolutely do not understand why you would vote against your own collective interest for a small amount of union dues. That is not snark, it's a real statement. I legitimately do not understand it. Can someone who works/worked one of these jobs please explain it to me? I am so confused by how lopsided this was.

Assuming you're not an Amazon warehouse employee, but they have more skin in the game than you. So presumably their opinion is more informed and reasoned. I don't think its as clear cut as "in your interest". I certainly wouldn't vote to unionize my profession and I would even go as far as avoiding unionized fields. I prefer to have a direct relationship with my employer. I stay away from organizations that have a ta…

> I stay away from organizations that have a table that will tell you how much you'll make after N years.

I don't think that's necessarily a characteristic of a union shop and if it is, those are probably minimums.

For example, professional baseball players and are unionized yet individuals can still negotiate salary.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#60

Post by anotherman554 »

dylan604 wrote: post #36
kadomony wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the folks who vote aren't really the type to sit down and think long-term. $50/month in dues getting them +$2-3k more annually every two years? They won't do the math and see they'd make a net profit of whatever that annual income increase is minus $600. There was some great video floating around recently of a forklift operator or something who explained what his union dues got him and he was so informed and…

Right up until that new raise puts you in the lowest tier of the next tax bracket so that you suddenly make less by making more.

That's not how tax brackets work. You never make "less" when you make more money.
Post reply on HN