Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama • Hacker News Board

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#201

Post by pc86 » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 4:40 PM UTC

bko wrote: post #113

greenie_beans wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your union needs seem much different than the typical warehouse or factory worker. Especially if you're on HN — I'm sure most everybody on this website would benefit more from "a direct relationship with my employer". A random overworked Amazon warehouse worker doesn't have that sort of managerial access or a skill to leverage for negotiating.

I don't think this is necessarily true. Turnover among low paid staff is extremely high. For instance, take McDonalds workers: McDonald's Mr. Floersch the managerial turnover was at 20% globally while that of the crew members averaged between 80 percent and 90 percent. [0] That high turnover means that low paid employees are much faster to leave. Some don't even show up to their first day of work. It's also selection…

Not only this (which is super accurate in my limited experience with these types of jobs in HS/college), but that high turnover even among managerial staff means that really to advance at least a few levels in the organization, all it takes is 1) sticking around; 2) not being bad at your job (not even being really good just be decent).

Hell, I used to be a dishwasher then line cook at a Friendly's (east coast family restaurant, primary PA/NJ/NY/CT/MA) for two years and by the time I left for college I was the most senior person there who didn't have a key to open the building. And two of the three cooks who had keys were still in school, one HS and one college.

Managing a restaurant is super demanding work but it's not that far off from median salary. It's not as much of a dead end as people think it is, especially if you start at the bottom and work up.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#202

Post by pc86 » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 4:41 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.

Surely you're not suggesting that professional atheletes' unions are in any way comparable to a union representing warehouse employees.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#203

Post by conanbatt » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 4:41 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.

The kind of people that would like to be in unions is not the same kind of people that would not like to be in unions.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#204

Post by macinjosh » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 4:41 PM UTC

Loughla wrote: post #55

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

"The two jobs that I was in a union, the union was massively beneficial to my life."

Just because the union was beneficial does not mean it was better to have it around than not to. You only experienced one side of the coin in those situations.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#205

Post by jimbob45 » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 4:41 PM UTC

_jal wrote: post #194

redkoala wrote: post #14

Unions don’t always contribute to a better outcome for their workers, and it looks like working conditions wasn’t a strong enough driver for the majority of the workers. It’s hard to motivate a vote for unions when Amazon pays double the federal minimum wage.

> Unions don’t always contribute to a better outcome for their workers You can say this about anything. Getting a job doesn't always contribute to a better outcome for the unemployed. Getting healthcare doesn't always contribute to better health outcomes. Getting housing after being homeless doesn't always lead to a better life. > It’s hard to motivate a vote for unions when Amazon pays double the federal minimum wag…

Yeah, but this is the problem with the current debate around unions. Pro-union individuals aren’t willing to say, “Unions have some serious drawbacks“ and anti-union individuals aren’t willing to say, “Unions solve some critical issues for modern employees”.

Instead, both sides (rightfully) call each other out on their biases and no voter feels able to trust either side.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#206

Post by Mauricebranagh » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 4:42 PM UTC

tarquinpussy wrote: post #43

chrisseaton wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vote was to unionise the workplace, not to form a union. You can form a union whenever you want, like you can form any other group of people a club. You just can't unilaterally force an employer to deal with you.

I hate to say it but I think the UK system is better. No closed shops, but if enough of the workplace (50%?) join the union, the employer has to deal with them.

Its not as bad as the USA but getting recognition is still very hard in the UK

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#207

Post by atat7024 » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 4:43 PM UTC

mjfl wrote: post #197

redkoala wrote: post #14

Unions don’t always contribute to a better outcome for their workers, and it looks like working conditions wasn’t a strong enough driver for the majority of the workers. It’s hard to motivate a vote for unions when Amazon pays double the federal minimum wage.

A lot of unions ended up being just another means for the mafia to steal from the poor, skimming off the top of pensions funds and the like. Similar corruption exists today. It is inevitable.

Which shark do you trust to protect you?

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#208

Post by koboll » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 4:43 PM UTC

didgeoridoo wrote: post #86

tarquinpussy wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate to say it but I think the UK system is better. No closed shops, but if enough of the workplace (50%?) join the union, the employer has to deal with them.

Is that meaningfully different from a vote, then? You get the majority, you get the union. If you’re a recognized union, NLRB says the employer must deal with you.

It almost seems more onerous, because "vote" requires less of a commitment, arguably, than "join"

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#209

Post by Loughla » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 4:43 PM UTC

luckylion wrote: post #82

darkwater wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP is actually just asking why, and explaining they don't understand why workers voted that way, which superficially seems "wrong".

And that's paternalistic, isn't it? "They voted against their interest" implies that OP knows/decides what their interests are. Personally, I've never met someone who knew workers that was fundamentally surprised by their decisions. It was always the people who only talked, read and wrote about workers that were flabbergasted. Source: worked as a consultant for a union in Europe for a decade.

OP was implying what his/her interests are, or rather, would be, s/he believes, in this case. Source: I am OP and that was my intention.

That's why I asked for someone with direct experience to comment. I am confused, based on my own viewpoint and experience with unions.

>I've never met someone who knew workers that was fundamentally surprised by their decisions.

I don't, genuinely don't understand this sentence. What is workers? Who are workers? What group of people would you consider workers? I've been part of two unions, both of which benefited me, personally, immensely. These were knowledge jobs and not hands-on jobs. Am I a worker? My father is very blue-collar manufacturing and he has been both anti- and pro-union, depending on which shop he worked for. Is he a worker?

I don't understand what you're saying. Honestly. It sounds like you're the font of some mystical knowledge about a mythical group of people. What do you mean by your statement? I don't get it.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#210

Post by fartcannon » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 4:43 PM UTC

aarongray wrote: post #127

Speaking as someone who lives adjacent to Bessemer but who does not work at Amazon, you need to understand that Bessemer is a dying city, a slum. These were the best paying jobs that many of these workers had had in their entire lives, it is no wonder that a majority of them decided not to bite the hand that was feeding them.

What a tragic way to frame it. The USA (and all the world governments) need to take care of it's poor people better so they don't have to choose indentured servitude over poverty.

Edit: Added the bit about all the world governments