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

271–280 of 1001 posts

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#271

Post by bradj »

MattGaiser wrote: post #221
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.

One person earning $15 Amazon in Bessemer is solidly middle class for that town. https://247wallst.com/special-report/2019/07/22/worst-cities...

Just as comparison, an entry level firefighter in Bessemer makes about $12/hour starting out. https://www.pbjcal.org/documents/salary/03BS/firefighter.pdf

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#272

Post by specialist »

kukx wrote: post #244
fartcannon wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

The people need to take care of themselves first, then their family, then their immediate surrounding, then their region and their country. Reversing the dependency on a large scale is not sustainable. Someone's right is someone else responsibility, for someone to receive money, someone else has to provide it. The government is a middleman in this transaction that wastes a substantial share of the value in the proces…

> Someone's right is someone else responsibility

I don't follow. What are some examples of this?

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#273

Post by Aunche »

drivebycomment wrote: post #243
AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me personally is anti-monopoly. If a union can only operate by forming a workforce monopoly - something is wrong with the model itself.

By that definition, companies are workplace monopolies. So are you against companies ? If you want to argue you can choose a different company, by the same token you can choose a different union by choosing a different company.

The economic term for is "monopsony," where a single buyer has disproportionate leverage. However, there isn't much evidence this occurs in most labor markets. People can and do often leave Amazon for another job.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopsony

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#274

Post by objclxt »

Someone1234 wrote: post #132

HN is very consistently anti-union. My question is this: Where did you get information about unions? Because people keep mentioning their "bad reputation" and then start listing off a bunch of "facts" that read like they're bullets straight out of one of those anti-union videos during onboard at several major employers (Walmart, Target, Amazon, etc). So anti-union people exactly where does your information come from?…

From what I can tell, a lot of people in tech are anti blue collar union, but mistakenly assume that blue-collar unions are all unions.

For example, just in the replies to your comment people are saying they dislike unions because they protect the incompetent, stifle progression, give preferential treatment purely on seniority, etc.

But then go look at Hollywood, with the Screen Actors Guild, the Writers Guild, the PGA, etc. These are unions that have some of the most highly paid and richest people in the world as members. The same is true in the sports world.

And sure, these unions are not perfect by a long shot, but they are doing a huge amount to hold what is ultimately a very exploitative industry to account.

Of course, companies like Google, Amazon, and the like would much prefer software engineers continued to think that all unions were like the Teamsters. They don't want you to know that there's a whole class of professional unions serving some of the most highly paid people and engaging in collective bargaining.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#275

Post by blululu »

Someone1234 wrote: post #132

HN is very consistently anti-union. My question is this: Where did you get information about unions? Because people keep mentioning their "bad reputation" and then start listing off a bunch of "facts" that read like they're bullets straight out of one of those anti-union videos during onboard at several major employers (Walmart, Target, Amazon, etc). So anti-union people exactly where does your information come from?…

I would not say that I’m anti-union but my experience working with a large union was pretty universally negative. It was just one more layer of bureaucracy that never really advocated for anything good. They consistently failed to deliver pay or benefits increases but would tote meaningless symbolic victories. The union was generally out of touch with the workers. Personally I really like the idea of a workers association that would actually bring benefits to employees and focus on personally and community development as well but I don’t see a lot of innovation in how labor unions treat their constituents.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#276

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

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 would Amazon do if they did Unionize? Move the warehouse?

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#277

Post by judge2020 »

hinkley wrote: post #220
judge2020 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't get the impression that there is another union vote in the works at that particular facility.

What has that got to do with equating all unions with each other?

It's not conflating all unions, not even all unions in Alabama, it just mentions "in Alabama" since much less people would know where they meant if they said 'in Bessemer'.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#278

Post by mixedCase »

afiori wrote: post #233
fartcannon wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Yang had a nice plan for that :(

And no sustainable way to fund it.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#279

Post by fartcannon »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #263
kukx wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people need to take care of themselves first, then their family, then their immediate surrounding, then their region and their country. Reversing the dependency on a large scale is not sustainable. Someone's right is someone else responsibility, for someone to receive money, someone else has to provide it. The government is a middleman in this transaction that wastes a substantial share of the value in the proces…

The problem with the “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” thinking is that it ignores being born into the problem. Sure, some people can work their way out of a rut that their parents were in, but the majority can’t.

Not just that, but if we rank everyone, some people will inevitably be worse than others. Should those at the bottom be condemned to poverty?

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#280

Post by 2bitencryption »

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.

This may be a bit of an ignorant question, but...

Are "dying cities/slums" a purely American phenomenon, in terms of rich first-world countries?

Is there similarly a "rust belt" in Germany, of cities that had an economic collapse after manufacturing died out? Are there rich European countries with flailing cities that devolve into crime and poverty? Does Europe have its own Bessemers, Detroits? (though I do hear Detroit isn't as bad as it's made out to be)

Post reply on HN