Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama • Hacker News Board

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#71

Post by baron816 » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 3:43 PM UTC

prepend wrote: post #26

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 think reasons will vary, and I didn’t vote in this event. But in previous situations I’ve not supported unionization due to how it favored existing workers in ways I thought were unfair in that all layoffs were due to seniority not performance so older workers would be kept and younger workers laid off, no matter what. It also established more rigid pay levels that were better on average but not as good for high pe…

> it was good if you were in the union and employed, but was much harder to get work and join the union.

This is my fundamental problem with unions—it helps the insiders and hurts everyone else.

Amazon’s working condition are rough (and I really hope that changes), but there are plenty of jobs out there that are much worse and don’t pay nearly as well. They just get all the attention because of their size and impact.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#72

Post by vidarh » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 3:43 PM UTC

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…

Unions operate on a voluntary membership only basis most places, and plenty of countries with such systems have far higher unionisation rates than the US.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#73

Post by hobs » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 3:44 PM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #69

anotherman554 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Your take home is what most people consider "making" even they know their actual salary is what they "make". I made a higher salary working in a state with state income taxes. Took a pay cut to move to a state without state income taxes. My take home went up (obviously). So I "made" more in take home by "making" less.

And in this case your take home would go up 100% of the time you got a raise - only the raise amount itself would decrease proportionally to your increased income.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#74

Post by tarquinpussy » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 3:44 PM UTC

vidarh wrote: post #72

underseacables wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Unions operate on a voluntary membership only basis most places, and plenty of countries with such systems have far higher unionisation rates than the US.

[flagged]

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#75

Post by hinkley » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 3:45 PM UTC

RankingMember wrote: post #48

dylan604 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 marginal tax rates work, though- You get taxed higher on the amount above the threshold, not on the entire amount.

If you're below the poverty line, it's possible to make less by making more by disqualifying yourself for public aid.

But if the Amazon workers are in that situation then we would need to expand this conversation anyway.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#76

Post by bko » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 3:45 PM UTC

criddell wrote: post #59

bko wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That's true, but unionized spots have such a strong individualistic component to the work. However, in industries such as warehouse workers, the employee ability is a lot more uniform, so I doubt there would be provisions for superstars to negotiate salaries.

It would more likely be something akin to a teacher union, with teaching being in between performance athletes and uniform workers. And even there I don't think individual teachers have much power to negotiate salary, but I could be wrong.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#77

Post by sumtechguy » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 3:45 PM UTC

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.

For someone making 20 an hour that would amount to about 400-2000 less per year (1 to 4 percent). With nothing to really show for it at first. At my current pay scale I would grumble about that amount but not be too worried about it. But at the lower end it matters more and I would probably be very angry about it.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#78

Post by throw4downvote » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 3:46 PM UTC

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.

Ironically I think this is a good example of one of the weaknesses many people see in unions. Here we have a group of people who have voted "against their collective interest" (which is a dubious claim imo, but let's assume that it's true for the sake of argument). If they were already unionized, what's to stop them to similarly keep voting "against their collective interest", as viewed by one individual within the organization? All of this to say, I don't trust a large group of other people to vote for what's best for me personally. See also: US presidential elections, usually close to a 50/50 vote, where most people consider "their side" to be unequivocally aligned with their own interests, and the other side to be heinous and corrupt. Peoples perceptions and the objective truth are rarely aligned when there's money and campaigning involved.

(Throwaway because being anti-union is unfortunately taboo)

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#79

Post by RankingMember » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 3:46 PM UTC

hinkley wrote: post #75

RankingMember wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how marginal tax rates work, though- You get taxed higher on the amount above the threshold, not on the entire amount.

If you're below the poverty line, it's possible to make less by making more by disqualifying yourself for public aid. But if the Amazon workers are in that situation then we would need to expand this conversation anyway.

Agreed. My comment regards income tax brackets, not public aid.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#80

Post by lr4444lr » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 3:46 PM UTC

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.

Maybe they're worried that Amazon will not want to do business with union labor and just hire people willing to work unrepresented for 15/hr. minimum.

Maybe work-life at Amazon low end is not as bad as the media sensationlizes. Why should it be your default to consider this as paradoxical rather than evidence?