Leaked memo reveals Amazon’s plans to combat the Teamsters in California • Hacker News Board

Re: Leaked memo reveals Amazon’s plans to combat the Teamsters in California

#191

Post by zugi » Mon, Aug 01, 2022, 3:17 PM UTC

xyzzyz wrote: post #168

adriand wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s also so incredibly cynical. They aren’t supporting these organizations because it’s the right thing to do. It’s just a means to an end, namely preventing workers from organizing. I wonder how many people who called out Amazon’s supposedly enlightened actions as unlikely to be altruistic or genuine were accused of being conspiracy theorists.

It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities, but of their advantages.

Unexpected Adam Smith - nice!

And even apart from questions of economic systems, second-guessing peoples' motives is almost never productive.

Re: Leaked memo reveals Amazon’s plans to combat the Teamsters in California

#192

Post by kolbe » Mon, Aug 01, 2022, 3:46 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #89

kolbe wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to give some support for this intangible and unverifiable complaint?

Just because you don’t like a statement doesn’t mean it’s unverifiable, objectively: Average Warehouse Worker Hourly Pay “Avg. Base Hourly Rate (USD)” $14.99/ hour and $19.57 is top 10%. https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Warehouse_Worker/Ho... As to the job sucking, “Amazon warehouse workers suffer serious injuries at twice the rate of rivals, study finds“ https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/12/study-amazon-workers-s…

Quoting statistics from labor union coalitions [0] (usually mob controlled and heavily influenced by their agenda) is really flimsy evidence, aside from the fact that causal inference is not a part of it. So, yes, I reassert this is 'unverifiable' unionist talking points.

According to their own data, Amazon only had higher rates of "light duty" injury (most of which are not "serious" as they claim). This is easily explained by Amazon's need to report all cuts and bruises due to the targets on their backs, while others gladly omit them--especially say, unionized ones where the leaders would logically tell them to keep cuts and bruises silent to juice their numbers.

[0] The Strategic Organizing Center (SOC) is a democratic coalition of four labor unions: Service Employees International Union (SEIU), International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT), Communications Workers of America (CWA) and United Farmworkers of America (UFW). Together, SOC-affiliated unions represent more than 4 million workers.

Re: Leaked memo reveals Amazon’s plans to combat the Teamsters in California

#193

Post by chimineycricket » Mon, Aug 01, 2022, 4:20 PM UTC

sgift wrote: post #190

smegger001 wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the teamsters union isn't exactly a small underdog with no funding either.

Compared to Amazon? Yes, they are.

you could say that to mean the money power of anyone/anything, what's the point in doing that

Re: Leaked memo reveals Amazon’s plans to combat the Teamsters in California

#194

Post by stale2002 » Mon, Aug 01, 2022, 6:02 PM UTC

deadbolt wrote: post #165

stale2002 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Source on jtode wanting to "take away these people's jobs"?

If the other person wants to say "Yes, I am totally glad that Amazon gave these people jobs, and Amazon is good for doing that, and I take back my statement where I attack amazon, for profiting, by giving people these jobs", then that would be great.

But if they are unwilling to explicitly say that amazon giving these people these jobs is a good thing, then I think that says a lot.

Specifically, they should say, it is a good thing for amazon to "opportunistically". give these people those jobs, instead of saying that this "opportunistic" behavior of giving people those jobs is bad.

Re: Leaked memo reveals Amazon’s plans to combat the Teamsters in California

#195

Post by huetius » Mon, Aug 01, 2022, 7:05 PM UTC

Cyberdog wrote: post #169

huetius wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We’re talking about plan to subvert unions. It is one thing to do something that is both good for me and also good for others. It is quite another to do something ostensibly good, but with the ulterior intention of preventing the good of another.

Giving a job to an ex-con is both good for the ex-con and good for others, as giving the ex-con something to live for greatly reduces the chance that they will return to antisocial behavior. As a non-Teamster, I'm not really sure what good is done for me if a Teamster gets a job, or what harm is done to me if they don't. Frankly, the more this idea is being discussed here, the more I'm hoping Amazon hires as many ex-…

My neighbor, who is my rival, wants to get a Red Rider BB Gun. I do not want this to happen, because this threatens my status as the cool kid on the block. If I just buy myself a Red Rider BB Gun, he will call me a copycat and make me look bad. So instead, I buy a Red Rider BB Gun for the dorky kid down the corner, who is not a threat to me. I get to look magnanimous, my rival is thwarted, the dorky kid has a cool toy. It seems that what I have done is certainly good for me, and the dorky kid has for sure gained something, but have I really done a good thing? Or have I done a selfish thing — using the dorky kid as a means to achieve a selfish end (thwarting my rival)? And if we are to say that my intent does not matter, we have to also accept that this has tremendous knock-on implications, especially problematic for concepts upon which we regularly depend, like merit and guilt.

As for whether Unions are good or not, my answer would be that they are good. They represent a tried, effectual response to the “social question” which emerged in the late 19th Century, avoiding the destructive poles of unconstrained capitalism and revolutionary socialism. It is also noteworthy that independent trade unions have historically acted as a bulwark against various totalitarianisms of both left and right. It is also true that some unions have been guilty of violence, corruption, ideological craziness, and narrow selfishness, but I would suggest that this is not a unique problem for unions.

Re: Leaked memo reveals Amazon’s plans to combat the Teamsters in California

#196

Post by danielscrubs » Wed, Aug 03, 2022, 11:07 AM UTC

whatshisface wrote: post #159

danielscrubs wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if they are not actively searching for a job. OECDs definition: “ The unemployed are people of working age who are _without work_ , are available for work, and have taken specific steps to find work.” This number for the year was around 4.7. Labor force participation would decrease when people retire or never needed to work in the first place. But I understand your point, it includes some people that will easily…

Since people who have given up looking for work do not count towards the measured unemployment rate (and more to the point are not part of the concept of minimum unemployment), ex-cons are not a part of that notional 4%.

But the ones in the article did search :)

Re: Leaked memo reveals Amazon’s plans to combat the Teamsters in California

#197

Post by jtode » Tue, Aug 09, 2022, 5:21 PM UTC

stale2002 wrote: post #194

deadbolt wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Source on jtode wanting to "take away these people's jobs"?

If the other person wants to say "Yes, I am totally glad that Amazon gave these people jobs, and Amazon is good for doing that, and I take back my statement where I attack amazon, for profiting, by giving people these jobs", then that would be great. But if they are unwilling to explicitly say that amazon giving these people these jobs is a good thing, then I think that says a lot. Specifically, they should say, it i…

If they're paying them less than living wages - specifically, if they are paying them less than anyone else doing the same job - it's opportunistic. If they are making a point of hiring ex-inmates and giving them all the same pay, benefits, etc, as anyone else, I take my statement back.