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

191–200 of 327 posts

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

#191

Post by trollbridge »

sebtron wrote: post #49
mytailorisrich wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 co…

Delta’s flight attendants (and a few other groups) aren’t in a union.

This has left Delta very motivated to make sure their flight attendants are happy so that they won’t unionise.

The end result is better workers, happier customers, and more productive workplace. But this wouldn’t happen without the threat of unionising hanging over Delta’s head.

I personally think a good outcome in situations like Apple is having maybe half their stores union, half not - Apple would be very motivated to keep the non-union employees happy. Customers could end up seeing which stores work better. A competitive marketplace, if you will.

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

#192

Post by tyingq »

Stranger43 wrote: post #22

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.

I think mostly because they think it's potentially detrimental. And the financial consequences of doing illegal things to fight unions are substantially lower than their perception of what unions might cost them.

Like from this article..."The board cannot impose fines or direct punishments against Apple for its violations".

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

#193

Post by [deleted] »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #57
sebtron wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 co…

The purpose of unions is to extract as much as possible from the employer on the behalf of its members, or at least to extract more than the employer would otherwise have given. You do not contradict anything I have written nor provide any examples of how unions might be a positive for employers... Again, if an happier, more productive employee benefits the company then the market will sort it out by itself (For inst…

[deleted]

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

#194

Post by trollbridge »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #115

In Japan, there's a really symbiotic relationship between unions and corporations. Unions are very powerful, but they also take stakes in the corporations. I'm pretty sure that union reps often sit on corporate boards. Japan has a long culture of employee relations, but they also work their asses off. I don't think Japanese unions would cover slackers, which is a popular view of US unions.

My friend’s brother was in the pipefitter’s union. Those guys worked so hard, I don’t think I would have lasted a week on the jobsite. He eventually quit after saving enough money because of the long hours and hard physical work.

He did get paid very well, got good overtime for those long hours, and safety came first. The benefits of a union.

It may be better to say “Unions cover workers whom management accuses of being slackers.” In my experience, the worst “slackers” are often in management (my view on this is from when I was in management myself).

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

#195

Post by malcolmgreaves »

datavirtue wrote: post #159
whamlastxmas wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

If they aren't allowed to strike why do people keep signing contracts with them?

Because the police union covers for cops that break the law.

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

#196

Post by harimau777 »

alkonaut wrote: post #123
DrewRWx wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Police aren't labor and therefore are not a labor union.

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)?

"Labor" isn't being used in the sense of just "someone who does work". It's being used in the sense of one of the sides in class warfare. Police generally work on the side of management rather than the side of labor therefore they aren't labor in the sense being spoken about.

Note that solidarity is an important principle in the labor movement. So the fact that police the police might act as "labor" in their personal negotiations with management isn't considered to make them part of "labor" in the general sense; because they don't show solidarity with other unions.

Think of it in terms of regular warfare. Just because two nations separately fight the same country in different wars doesn't make them allies. They are only allies if they support each other in wars against that other country.

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

#197

Post by weard_beard »

trollbridge wrote: post #189

This seems to be part of a persistent pattern of businesses thinking they are above the law, and when challenged, the filing of endless countersuits and appeals. At some point, the democratic process elected Congress and the laws passed therein, and businesses exist at the pleasure of the people and their elected representatives, not the other way around. A business that doesn’t want to unionise is free to close up s…

Regulatory capture and non-existant enforcement mechanisms would beg to differ.

It seems more and more that the US is waiting for the general public to commit egregious acts and then will crack down and that this is the ONLY function of the US government at all levels.

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

#198

Post by trollbridge »

theshackleford wrote: post #184
mogiddy55 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The corporations are the only ones that can pay the salaries being requested by labor activists though. IMO, a lot of the agitation for higher wages as a universal right has a negative effect on smaller businesses, while the corporations (which are the actual targets) have an easier time adapting to changes in federal and state law, for example by compensating with foreign revenue. I can't imagine it makes starting a…

> I can't imagine it makes starting a new small business any easier when you're required to pay employees $20/hr. Oh no! Anyway…

A new business with 1 employee isn’t going to be union. Federal and (in many) state minimum wage laws don’t even apply. Labour regulation kicks in as you get more and more employees.

Most activists are demanding higher wages from bigger employers.

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

#199

Post by sandworm101 »

trollbridge wrote: post #189

This seems to be part of a persistent pattern of businesses thinking they are above the law, and when challenged, the filing of endless countersuits and appeals. At some point, the democratic process elected Congress and the laws passed therein, and businesses exist at the pleasure of the people and their elected representatives, not the other way around. A business that doesn’t want to unionise is free to close up s…

>> businesses exist at the pleasure of the people and their elected representatives

As one noted politician famously said: "Corporations are people". The issue is that soo much of US jurisprudence has granted corporate entities all the rights of personhood. The only thing they cannot yet do is vote, but that too will come. They are certainly today allowed to vote with their wallets by financially supporting candidates.

Part of this issue is in turn tied to how so many powerful people in the US cloak themselves in corporate status. Taylor Swift exists are a person, but all her money flows through her corporation. Trump exists as a person, but all his property is held by his corporations. Some of this is a game to avoid taxation but it is also used to shield people from liabilities. So such powerful people take any attack on corporate personhood very personally.

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

#200

Post by spamizbad »

Stranger43 wrote: post #22

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.

Nobody wants to admit it, but businesses are deeply ideological. Not in the typical sense, but they have lots of strongly held irrational beliefs that are contradictory. They are not rational actors.
Post reply on HN