Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama • Hacker News Board

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#411

Post by hintymad » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 5:27 PM UTC

vlozko wrote: post #386

duckfang wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> hard to fire bad performers In the jobs that I do, "bad performance" is super subjective and very hard to measure. It's also the common canard to use from the managerial class to get rid of someone they don't like. > your merits don't matter at all They don't either in the non-union corporate world either. They pay as little as they can get away with. They'll assign as much work as you can possibly do, and then pil…

> In the jobs that I do, "bad performance" is super subjective and very hard to measure. It's also the common canard to use from the managerial class to get rid of someone they don't like. Have you not heard of The Rubber Room? Or the dance of the lemons? At least with respect to teachers unions, the problem is real and in a very detrimental way. Even when a schools district wants to fire a bad teacher, the process c…

And even worse, schools can't be shut down. It's okay for companies to have unions. In the worse case, the company closes doors, so ultimately the union needs to work with the company one way or another. In government entities, unions are tumors as they don't need to worry about their employers going down.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#412

Post by hnunionthrow » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 5:28 PM UTC

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.

I believe what GP was alluding to is that if a workplace is unionized, the worker does not have a choice of wanting to be a part of the union or not(in a non right to work state), and so essentially a monopoly. IF the worker wants to work for that employer, he can only do so via the union. No way for the worker to work for the employer and not wanting to do absolutely nothing with the union.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#413

Post by tablespoon » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 5:28 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #396

asdff wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon moving into these impovershed areas, becoming the majority employer, and having absolute influence over the local governance and electorate they themselves employ makes these places de facto a company town. Brilliant move, totally evil genius move, but brilliant.

So let me get this straight: companies shouldn't be investing money into revitalizing impoverished areas?

> So let me get this straight: companies shouldn't be investing money into revitalizing impoverished areas?

No, they should do so, just not be so exploitative about it (e.g. deliberately going into areas full of desperate people, for the reason of using that desperation to exert maximum control with minimum accountability).

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#414

Post by camjohnson26 » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 5:28 PM UTC

kethinov wrote: post #242

camjohnson26 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They probably just examined the same facts as you and came to a different conclusion. They are closer to their own situation, which doesn’t always mean they will make the right decision, but I would be very careful about telling someone how to live their own life.

What set of facts could possibly have made unionization a bad idea? I genuinely can't imagine a single hypothetical which would make voting against this a good idea and would love to hear one.

From the article: “A lot of us are in agreement that we don’t need anybody there to speak for us and take our money,” said Cori Jennings, 40 years old, who works at the Bessemer facility and voted against unionizing. Ms. Jennings said she and many of her colleagues were also eager for the national attention to fade: “We want our lives to go back to normal.”

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#415

Post by mariksolo » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 5:28 PM UTC

specialist wrote: post #272

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…

> Someone's right is someone else responsibility I don't follow. What are some examples of this?

If college is free (or loans are forgiven), people who never went to college would have to subsidize those who did.

If healthcare is free, people who are healthy have to pay healthcare for those who aren't.

I'm not taking a stance one way or the other on these issues, just trying to illustrate the argument.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#416

Post by tittenfick » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 5:28 PM UTC

flavius29663 wrote: post #246

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

$15 an hour is more than you can get in almost any place in Europe or the world for unskilled labor, what are you talking about?

Nah, most jobs in super markets would net you the same (if you have no experience.) Germany here.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#417

Post by hrktb » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 5:29 PM UTC

wernercd wrote: post #359

hrktb wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't it be both ?

Because crying victimhood over every perceived slight becomes the boy who cried wolf - sooner or later everyone realizes that the only way a union can justify itself is by creating problems where none existed. Otherwise, why waste money on union dues for something that isn't needed? It CAN be both... but generally it isn't.

I have no knowledge of Boeing's internal state, so tried to get a proxy of their general attitude [0].

Every company big enough will have its share of shitty issues, but even taking it with a grain of salt it doesn't look to me like a company that needs no employee representation to counter-balance the management.

[0] https://violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org/prog.php?parent=b...

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#418

Post by PragmaticPulp » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 5:29 PM UTC

hrktb wrote: post #257

brightball wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was similar to the Boeing situation in Charleston, SC. Boeing came in and brought great jobs with them. Then the union reps came in and started acting like everybody was being wronged somehow.

Why can't it be both ?

Once the workers organize as a union, the company is forced to treat everything as a negotiation with the union instead of the employees. The union views their job as to always ask for more and push back on the employer, so the employer is incentivized to hold back raises, benefits, and concessions until it's time for negotiations. Giving away all of your bargaining chips before negotiations start is not a good strategy.

When you see headlines about unions negotiating certain benefits or raises from employers, it's often framed as a victory that wouldn't have happened without the union. The reality is more nuanced, as the union's existence forces the company to play hardball during negotiations so they have something to negotiate when it comes time to do the negotiations.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#419

Post by bhupy » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 5:29 PM UTC

starlust2 wrote: post #394

bhupy wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The warehouse workers get the same (extremely generous) healthcare as every other Amazon employee (due to ERISA). And even if they didn't, through the Affordable Care Act, someone at that income level can buy a "Gold" plan with low deductibles for $75/month. Obviously for Amazon workers, that's irrelevant. K-12 education is free, and once you factor in-state tuition and FAFSA, university is also basically free for an…

Neither of the options you listed is free.

Sure, and healthcare isn't "literally free" in loads of high standard of living first world countries. In France, for example, there's a 20% coinsurance that's paid on all treatments. With a few exceptions, most single payer countries have co-pays.

Amazon's plans can be found here: https://www.amazon.jobs/en/landing_pages/benefitsoverview-us

These plans are extended to every single Amazon employee, including the warehouse workers. Most of the warehouse workers we're talking about would probably choose the Kaiser HMO that has $0 deductible and 100% coverage; all they would pay is $30 co-pay. This is more or less how the single payer healthcare works in Australia, for example.

Re: Amazon workers vote against unionizing in Alabama

#420

Post by kmlx » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 5:29 PM UTC

quijoteuniv wrote: post #293

flavius29663 wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$15 an hour is more than you can get in almost any place in Europe or the world for unskilled labor, what are you talking about?

While that might be right,You are not taking into account that in Europe you get free healthcare & education.

free? they’re paid for by taxes.