151–160 of 327 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know what you've heard, but HR is not police for the employer, they protect the employer from the employee 99% of the time.
That's what they wrote. State police == police who work for the state Private police == police who work for a private entity Corporate police == police who work for the corporation (against the employee 99% of the time)
The key section of this story is >The board cannot impose fines or direct punishments against Apple for its violations. Which makes me wonder why they spent two years working on this investigation.
It seems like most of the "union problems" in the US arise from workers clashing with overly-greedy, abusive employers. The employer generally has more power in this relationship, and uses that power to squeeze every last bit of value out of their workforce. The workforce has few ways to push back against this, with unions being one of the options. Maybe if other options were on the table, there would be fewer union…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read up on primate behavior. Top executives are alpha males, and didn't get there without lots of compulsive control-seeking, dominance-asserting, etc. behavior patterns.
Did Europeans descend from elves instead of primates?
America didn't lose enough men to qualify for the "collectivism" unlock.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So they have a union, which is not a labor union? fair enough. It seems like a distinction without a difference for the topic. Some restrictions on strikes usually covers lots of different jobs (e.g. nurses).
The biggest tool a union has is striking. If you can’t strike you’re not really a union.
I wonder why US companies keep pulling stunts like this despite the data showing little negative impact of unionization to overall productivity nor company survival. It looks to be a purely dogmatic ego trip where somehow blind loyalty is demanded even when it's not actually necessary.
The key section of this story is >The board cannot impose fines or direct punishments against Apple for its violations. Which makes me wonder why they spent two years working on this investigation.
They have a lot more power than you might think from that quote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Labor_Relations_Board... They can now try Apple in an administrative court, with an 'administrative judge' selected by the agency, then get a (normal) Article 3 court to rubber-stamp their 'order'.
> The decision of the Administrative Law Judge may be reviewed by the five member boardI 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…
The only time a union definitely makes sense to an existing workforce is if they can suppress labor supply by implementing onerous barriers to entry into the profession, like lawyers, doctors and pilots have.
They can be a force of good for enforcing labor laws. But law enforcement is certainly not a job that should be left to private organisations, that really should be the role of the government. But even then, if you’re earning an SV salary, you absolutely don’t need a union’s help to settle your civil disputes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what sense aren't police labor? "Labor" literally just means "work"? It's not like the unions of managers, pilots, lawyers, NHL players or software developers aren't "labor unions"? Policemen are employed so their organization as employees is a labor union (or just "union" for short)?
Police are what shows up when labor strikes. They’re part of the government, not a part of the collective “labor” that is the rest of the working world. As an example, police are part of an association but not a union. They aren’t legally allowed to strike anywhere in the US. They serve the interests of capitalism, which is the other side of the coin of workers’ rights
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm struggling with what you meant by "it's just a language thing", that is of course true and what I was pointing out. For the purpose of good communication, everything is a language thing and language things are important. When we say "the police union isn't a labor union", we're people rejecting them from the classification even though they use the word because we don't think they fit in with our values. That's be…
> I'm struggling with what you meant by "it's just a language thing", that is of course true and what I was pointing out. For the purpose of good communication, everything is a language thing and language things are important. Ok fair enough. In english there is a distinction between just "Union" and "labor union". And under this distinction, a police union would not be a labor union. Language is important. Moving be…