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

U.S. Rules Apple Illegally Interrogated Staff and Confiscated Union Flyers

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 327 posts

Re: U.S. Rules Apple Illegally Interrogated Staff and Confiscated Union Flyers

#41

Post by mytailorisrich »

sebtron wrote: post #39
mytailorisrich wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it made no difference why would employees bother? It does make a negative difference for employers with potentially higher costs and lower flexibility over time.

It makes a positive difference for the employees. You seem to imply that this is correlated to a negative difference for the employer, which is completely wrong.

Obviously in general it makes a positive difference for employees, that was a rhetorical question...

I have listed two main negative differences it makes for employers. I am hard-pressed to find any positive differences for them... on the issues this touches it's pretty much a zero-sum game so if employees gain it means employers 'lose'.

If something is positive for both sides then I think the market will eventually adopt it on its own.

Re: U.S. Rules Apple Illegally Interrogated Staff and Confiscated Union Flyers

#42

Post by [deleted] »

ExoticPearTree wrote: post #28
jollofricepeas wrote: post #7

I don’t understand how so many HNers are anti-union and anti-collective bargaining. The fact that corporations and billionaires are so anti-union and engage in regular conduct like this demonstrates that unions are pro-worker and ideal for the balance needed in the US and across the globe. Balance is key between workers and owners. Without it we are left with growing wealth inequality such as… - ridiculous housing pr…

> I don’t understand how so many HNers are anti-union and anti-collective bargaining. I had the displeasure of working with union labor in the US, they would come in at 7 (who does that) and leave at 4 on the dot. Then worked with non-union labor: cheaper, worked as much as possible per day, got the job done faster. Money-wise it was less than union labor. Now tell me how is good for me, as a company that needs stuff…

[deleted]

Re: U.S. Rules Apple Illegally Interrogated Staff and Confiscated Union Flyers

#43

Post by lostlogin »

komali2 wrote: post #32
ein0p wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public school education is poor in part because it’s darn near impossible to fire bad teachers though. And I don’t see how unions would improve housing affordability. I’m not against unions per se, particularly for positions which are not as lavishly compensated as a typical white collar FAANG employee. I’m merely pointing out that you need to pick better examples. Otherwise you just undermine your own argument.

> impossible to fire bad teachers though. It's impossible to fire bad teachers (it really isn't, btw, at least not in Texas) because there are no teachers because teachers wages are pathologically low because every education department in the country is underfunded.

That’s causing the same problem then. If there are no teachers to hire, you’re less likely to fire

Re: U.S. Rules Apple Illegally Interrogated Staff and Confiscated Union Flyers

#44

Post by cjk2 »

therouwboat wrote: post #25
cjk2 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm anti-union AND pro labour regulation. Your government should be targeting wealth inequality with legislation and public services on all of these issues. The union tends to become another opaque organisation with a power hierarchy of its own and layers of internal politics and power struggles. The unions rarely if ever push for legislation change either because it would risk their existence. The corporations shoul…

"The corporations should live in fear of the government, not an independent union." I think that membership funded union would be much likely to protect worker rights than tax funded government.

But the union has little to no legislative power, only relying on lobbying and private legal cases, at which point you end up competing with non-union entities who have a lot more money.

Re: U.S. Rules Apple Illegally Interrogated Staff and Confiscated Union Flyers

#46

Post by nox101 »

komali2 wrote: post #32
ein0p wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public school education is poor in part because it’s darn near impossible to fire bad teachers though. And I don’t see how unions would improve housing affordability. I’m not against unions per se, particularly for positions which are not as lavishly compensated as a typical white collar FAANG employee. I’m merely pointing out that you need to pick better examples. Otherwise you just undermine your own argument.

> impossible to fire bad teachers though. It's impossible to fire bad teachers (it really isn't, btw, at least not in Texas) because there are no teachers because teachers wages are pathologically low because every education department in the country is underfunded.

IIUC the USA spend near the top per student of all countries. Why is it other countries get better results with less money?

https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cmd/education-exp...

Re: U.S. Rules Apple Illegally Interrogated Staff and Confiscated Union Flyers

#47

Post by dragonwriter »

ein0p wrote: post #9
jollofricepeas wrote: post #7

I don’t understand how so many HNers are anti-union and anti-collective bargaining. The fact that corporations and billionaires are so anti-union and engage in regular conduct like this demonstrates that unions are pro-worker and ideal for the balance needed in the US and across the globe. Balance is key between workers and owners. Without it we are left with growing wealth inequality such as… - ridiculous housing pr…

Public school education is poor in part because it’s darn near impossible to fire bad teachers though. And I don’t see how unions would improve housing affordability. I’m not against unions per se, particularly for positions which are not as lavishly compensated as a typical white collar FAANG employee. I’m merely pointing out that you need to pick better examples. Otherwise you just undermine your own argument.

> Public school education is poor in part because it’s darn near impossible to fire bad teachers though.

The funny thing is that public employment (in the US) is where unions have the least impact on firing difficulty, because employees have a property interest in their employment which means government — even as their employer — cannot deprive them of it without due process under the 5th (for the federal) or 14th (for states and subdivisions) amendments even if they are not unionized.

Also, the line you push about teachers is pushed by privatizers (and sometimes administrators as an excuse for their own failures), often supported by one or two anecdotes, so often as to have become an article of faith ib sone circles, but there is no systematic evidence for it.

Re: U.S. Rules Apple Illegally Interrogated Staff and Confiscated Union Flyers

#48

Post by dragonwriter »

ein0p wrote: post #16
walthamstow wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither of you are giving examples, only conjecture. Bad teachers are a noteworthy cause of poor schools. House prices wouldn't be so high if we had unions. Ok, prove it. Or at least give me some reasoning to go off.

What is the mechanism under which houses would be more affordable if employees had more money thanks to the unions? Real estate (and by extension rents) will take up any available slack on income.

> What is the mechanism under which houses would be more affordable if employees had more money thanks to the unions?

Employees have more money thanks to unions -> those deriving income from capital have less money -> narrower distribution of wealth -> goods (including housing) which both classes pursue are more affordable to the working class. QED.

Re: U.S. Rules Apple Illegally Interrogated Staff and Confiscated Union Flyers

#49

Post by sebtron »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #41
sebtron wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes a positive difference for the employees. You seem to imply that this is correlated to a negative difference for the employer, which is completely wrong.

Obviously in general it makes a positive difference for employees, that was a rhetorical question... I have listed two main negative differences it makes for employers. I am hard-pressed to find any positive differences for them... on the issues this touches it's pretty much a zero-sum game so if employees gain it means employers 'lose'. If something is positive for both sides then I think the market will eventually…

The purpose of unions is to make sure the employees work is sustainable, easier, pleasant if possible. On a more practical level this means enforcing work regulations, if an employer is at risk of breaking regulations (intentionally or not), unions will help them keep the line.

A happier employee is more productive and less likely to leave the company on the forst occasion or do anything hostile (stealing, selling company secrets).

This is not exactly news, it has been known for at least 150 years.

Re: U.S. Rules Apple Illegally Interrogated Staff and Confiscated Union Flyers

#50

Post by strken »

jollofricepeas wrote: post #7

I don’t understand how so many HNers are anti-union and anti-collective bargaining. The fact that corporations and billionaires are so anti-union and engage in regular conduct like this demonstrates that unions are pro-worker and ideal for the balance needed in the US and across the globe. Balance is key between workers and owners. Without it we are left with growing wealth inequality such as… - ridiculous housing pr…

Are so many of them anti-union? I don't see much evidence that they're any more against unions than the general population. It's surprising to me that nobody has pointed out this article has far fewer anti-union than pro-union comments.
Post reply on HN