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

Amazon workers on Staten Island vote to unionize

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 785 posts

Re: Amazon workers on Staten Island vote to unionize

#351

Post by Taikonerd »

rootusrootus wrote: post #324
cs702 wrote: post #103

A single successful effort of unionization at an Amazon facility is more than symbolic: It will encourage -- and serve as a blueprint for -- employees at other Amazon facilities to do the same. Moreover, it will motivate employees at other large companies to try. This has been brewing for a while. It's possible we'll see a generational wave of unionization.

> It's possible we'll see a generational wave of unionization. I fully expect this to happen. Younger folks today are the unlucky beneficiary of years of wage stagnation and home price inflation. They have every right to be angry, and I think they are collectively starting to realize that they have a lot of power to change the status quo. At the risk of veering into politics, I'm also not sure how this will change th…

> Normally this kind of movement would be a strength of the left. But lately the right has become quite populist, so maybe this plays in their direction.

I saw an op-ed from a conservative magazine on this exact theme: [1]. The author basically says, "if we're claiming to be the party of the working class, shouldn't we be in favor of this?"

1: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/republicans...

Re: Amazon workers on Staten Island vote to unionize

#352

Post by robomartin »

zeku wrote: post #312
robomartin wrote: post #282

I was in a union (not by choice) the first ten years or so of my professional life. To put it in simple terms: I despise them. Yes, of course, they had reason to exist in the dark ages. Today, I think they are in a range between counterproductive and dangerous. Before anyone make a move for the jugular: I make a distinction between union members and union management (the entity). Union members are hard working folks,…

The simple fact is that an adult needs X amount of money to be able to live with roommates, eat, drive their car to your job, etc. That amount of money is about $15 most places in the country at absolute minimum and that will be a struggle. If you can't afford to pay someone enough money at 40 hours a week that they can live with 1 other person in an apartment, eat, buy a car, maintain a car, buy gas, and have a smal…

> The simple fact is that an adult needs X amount of money to be able to live with roommates, eat, drive their car to your job, etc.

Sure. Let's pay everyone $50 an hour then?

Do you understand how ridiculous it is to base a minimum wage on what an adult needs to live with roommates?

It's a need. Of course it is a need. However, forcing a minimum wage isn't the solution at all. If it were, we could "fix it" by paying everyone $20, $30, $50, $500 per hour. Anyone but a complete moron can easily understand what happens if we set a minimum wage of $100 per hour. EVERY JOB THAT CAN BE EXPORTED WILL BE EXPORTED.

For everything else, inflation will absolutely explode. Which means that your $100 per hour won't buy you anything except for everything made in China (which will have higher prices because the Chinese are not stupid and will raise their prices to make more money). Home will cost 10x more and cars will double or triple in price. So, the $100 per hour quickly turns into a real $10 per hour. All we've done is play with numbers to create funny money. The ONLY ONES who benefit are the Chinese because they are doing everything they have to do in order to grow their economy and become the dominant economy in the world for the next 200 years.

That's the game and the stakes. People are allowing politicians to run us into the ground (or below it).

Your "simple economics" isn't real economics. It's wishful thinking. In the real world, with a globally integrated economy, a job and a standard of living can only exist in the context of where goods and services can be delivered more effectively.

This isn't even about greed. Anyone who has migrated work to China and other shores understands this very well. Only the ignorant equate this to greed. The truth of the matter is that market forces push pricing down. Since you won't pay more than $99 for a blender, everyone has to make them in China and margins are narrow. Nobody is making 300% margins because they went to China. If they do, those margins will collapse very quickly as competitors move their ops to China and push pricing down. That's economic reality. Like it or not.

Try to make something not-trivial in the US or Europe and see what happens. Most people would be horrified by the reality those of us in manufacturing understand all too well. Ignorance is bliss, as they say.

Re: Amazon workers on Staten Island vote to unionize

#353

Post by robomartin »

tsimionescu wrote: post #332
robomartin wrote: post #282

I was in a union (not by choice) the first ten years or so of my professional life. To put it in simple terms: I despise them. Yes, of course, they had reason to exist in the dark ages. Today, I think they are in a range between counterproductive and dangerous. Before anyone make a move for the jugular: I make a distinction between union members and union management (the entity). Union members are hard working folks,…

Your view is massively in the wrong. Companies are wasting waaaay more money on stock buybacks, huge compensation packages for executives, nepotism and corruption in business deals and other similar things than they are on employee wages.

I don't even know how to respond to this fantasy you paint. As I told someone else, try to manufacture something non-trivial in the US or Europe and you might begin to understand.

Re: Amazon workers on Staten Island vote to unionize

#354

Post by mplewis »

robomartin wrote: post #352
zeku wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simple fact is that an adult needs X amount of money to be able to live with roommates, eat, drive their car to your job, etc. That amount of money is about $15 most places in the country at absolute minimum and that will be a struggle. If you can't afford to pay someone enough money at 40 hours a week that they can live with 1 other person in an apartment, eat, buy a car, maintain a car, buy gas, and have a smal…

> The simple fact is that an adult needs X amount of money to be able to live with roommates, eat, drive their car to your job, etc. Sure. Let's pay everyone $50 an hour then? Do you understand how ridiculous it is to base a minimum wage on what an adult needs to live with roommates? It's a need. Of course it is a need. However, forcing a minimum wage isn't the solution at all. If it were, we could "fix it" by paying…

They’re already exporting jobs.

Re: Amazon workers on Staten Island vote to unionize

#355

Post by rocqua »

nessguy wrote: post #326
Barrera wrote: post #250

Freakonomics ran a recent episode on unions [1]. A pair of interesting stats were presented near the start: the approval rating for unions stands at 70% in the US (even higher among the young) at the same time that union membership stands at 10%. Both numbers are at multi-decade extremes. I don't think it's any coincidence that this success at Amazon comes right now. After the GFC all regulatory efforts turned to kee…

I like the idea of unions more than the reality. My first job was earning minimum wage working full-time at Safeway. After working there for about 9 months I quit because I didn't want to pay union dues to join the union. I was already only making minimum wage, it wasn't like the union was improving my salary. The required hour long lunch breaks might have been thanks to the union, but I hated having to take hour lon…

Why would a union be company specific? It makes a lot of sense for a union to represent all workers doing e.g. car manufacturing.

Re: Amazon workers on Staten Island vote to unionize

#356

Post by bjourne »

fgonzag wrote: post #239
lamontcg wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its very on brand that the first response to this on HN is more or less: "Okay, hear me out, but what if Unions in America are really _too strong_?". Very counterintuitive thinking.

I've seen what large unions can do (just search for some of the largest Mexican unions, like the PEMEX one). Any organization of a certain scale and power gets corrupt, including private companies and unions. I strongly believe in unions, but I agree with OP that keeping them small and focused is better for both the interests of the company and the employees. Extreme power imbalances are seldom (and I'd dare say neve…

> Extreme power imbalances are seldom (and I'd dare say never) good. I've seen unions effectively bankrupt business during tough times.

Please be specific.

Re: Amazon workers on Staten Island vote to unionize

#357

Post by FateOfNations »

clove wrote: post #201
cs702 wrote: post #103

A single successful effort of unionization at an Amazon facility is more than symbolic: It will encourage -- and serve as a blueprint for -- employees at other Amazon facilities to do the same. Moreover, it will motivate employees at other large companies to try. This has been brewing for a while. It's possible we'll see a generational wave of unionization.

It will also encourage downsizing and expediting the shift to replacing humans with robots.

Relatively fewer but higher quality jobs isn’t necessarily a bad thing, especially in an industry where growth can absorb the efficiencies, rather than needing to resort to layoffs.

Re: Amazon workers on Staten Island vote to unionize

#358

Post by nopenopenopeno »

Spooky23 wrote: post #342
jdavis703 wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the trend continues as you posit, I would expect private-sector unions to become a non-partisan alignment, similar to how social security is sacrosanct in US politics. Most unions form at places that are genuinely terrible workspaces where workers have legitimate reasons to hate the boss. As unions become mainstream at places like Starbucks I would expect folks agitating for worker power to less radical.

It might, but they would have to be big enough to break the "conservative" alignment of resource extractors, religious fanatics and rich people. It's definitely possible in 10-20 years.

No post body was provided.

Re: Amazon workers on Staten Island vote to unionize

#359

Post by javert »

zenexer wrote: post #229
javert wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the conclusion you reach follows from the premises. There is unfairness in the world. That does not mean that HN is obligated to be a soapbox for all unfairness. Anyway, comments on HN should be intellectually substantive. That one was not. Yes, we should discuss this on HN. No, we should not have brand new accounts posting cheap opinion comments that are devoid of intellectual content.

Not every comment needs to be intellectually substantive. It's okay to be human and express some excitement now and then.

The problem is that political comments lead to unpleasant flame wars. Sure, people can express excitement. I didn't speak against that. You're doing a bait and switch by presenting it that way. Expressing excitement is very different than starting a political flame war.

Instead of having new accounts post empty pro-union comments and the anti-union people having to argue against them, it's better if we just not talking about that---unless it's an intellectually substantive conversation, in which case it's fine.

That's all I'm asking---I know it's too much for you to give.

Re: Amazon workers on Staten Island vote to unionize

#360

Post by rocqua »

wahern wrote: post #228
cool_dude85 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>He explained the reason unions in the US were shrinking is that they are too powerful. They control huge pension and healthcare portfolios and can completely control the relationship with employers, especially in closed shop situations. This is interesting. I'm a government employee with a union, a pension, health insurance, the whole deal. The union does not control the pension or healthcare in any way whatsoever.…

Private corporations no longer offer pension (i.e. defined benefit) plans, so if employees want a pension it's going to be managed by a union, assuming they even have a union. That's probably for the better because these days (as opposed to 70 years ago), unions will be far more responsible managers of a pension fund than corporations, partly because of stricter government oversight. Some other countries have nationa…

Unions have more hard power in the US. More control. Stuff like 'everyone who works has to be union'. Only X job can do Y. And Unions seek to increase their control as a defense against companies trying to take it back.

European (dutch specifically) Unions have soft power. The only real control they have is declaring a strike. Everything else is bargaining for better terms of employment. The underlying trick is that entire sectors (willingly) have collective terms of employment.

Post reply on HN