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

Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 403 posts

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#121

Post by mhoad »

f7fg_u-_h wrote: post #94
formerly_proven wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in theory unions have the correct incentive structure, as they get a fixed percentage of their member's incomes, so to get more money from their members, they need to negotiate better salaries for them.

Unions are compensated proportional to N*S where N is number of workers and S is average salary. Workers care about increasing S, but unions sometimes focus on increasing N because it is easier. But then the individual worker doesn't see their life improve.

N is also the power to negotiate in that equation in order to improve S. Increasing N makes total sense in that scenario.

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#122

Post by thepasswordis »

0n0n0m0uz wrote: post #109

People nowadays have no memory of the decades of struggle, sacrifice to win the rights we currently have. Unions are the most effective tool the working class has to affect change where they spend a majority of their waking life. No wonder why its demonized at every possible instance.

Strong unions certainly did wonderful things for the working class people of Detroit, Michigan.

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#123

Post by imgabe »

noisy_boy wrote: post #5

> The ALU may ask you to sign an authorization card or share a QR code to fill out an online authorization card. > This is a legally binding document Ooh scary ... is the employment contract signed by Amazon's employees not legally binding? How is it Amazon's business what their grown-ass employees can or cannot sign? > By signing a card or filling out an online authorization form, you are providing the ALU your pers…

What employment contract? They’re at will

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#124

Post by tarr11 »

GuB-42 wrote: post #84
photochemsyn wrote: post #10

Realistically an Amazon-wide union is the only way Amazon workers are going to get decent wage increases. If the USA is going to allow manufacturers to outsource the majority of well-paid (~$30/hr avg) manufacturing jobs to Mexico and China, without having any cross-border capital flow penalities (neoliberal globalism in a nutshell), then the major employers like Amazon and Walmart are going to have to double their w…

> Yes, that means less for the executives and shareholders. They may have to sell some of their properties, oh dear. Is it what usually happens when workers unionize? It seems like most of the times, the result is a higher price for the customer, at least when things go well.

It also means Amazon increases spending on automation.

https://techcrunch.com/2022/06/22/amazon-debuts-a-fully-auto...

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#125

Post by Spooky23 »

Retric wrote: post #48
lotsofpulp wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, that means less for the executives and shareholders. They may have to sell some of their properties, oh dear. Based on retail business profit margins, it would mean higher prices for customers. Not that that is a bad thing, less consumption would be great.

Competition limits how much they could raise prices, automation and efficiency increases are needed to compete.

Treating workers like shit and churning them limits the workers they can hire and retain.

They even know this - Amazon is running out of eligible workers to hire. But the need to hit quarterly metrics forces the line management to make strategically bad decisions.

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#126

Post by edmundsauto »

imgabe wrote: post #123
noisy_boy wrote: post #5

> The ALU may ask you to sign an authorization card or share a QR code to fill out an online authorization card. > This is a legally binding document Ooh scary ... is the employment contract signed by Amazon's employees not legally binding? How is it Amazon's business what their grown-ass employees can or cannot sign? > By signing a card or filling out an online authorization form, you are providing the ALU your pers…

What employment contract? They’re at will

You would still be likey to have a contract, it would specify at-will and a slew of other clauses.

It would not guarantee a term of employment, in the standard form (but could, if it were so modified).

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#127

Post by denimnerd42 »

0n0n0m0uz wrote: post #109

People nowadays have no memory of the decades of struggle, sacrifice to win the rights we currently have. Unions are the most effective tool the working class has to affect change where they spend a majority of their waking life. No wonder why its demonized at every possible instance.

yeah my parents only remember their parents having to move their family farm to a different state due to the trucking union (Teamsters, aka the actual mafia associated group). you know where the business was prior to 1950.. Ferguson outside St Louis where the riots were. So they certainly didn't bring prosperity to the area. There’s a middle history of unions that’s not so nice.

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#128

Post by Spooky23 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #26
photochemsyn wrote: post #10

Realistically an Amazon-wide union is the only way Amazon workers are going to get decent wage increases. If the USA is going to allow manufacturers to outsource the majority of well-paid (~$30/hr avg) manufacturing jobs to Mexico and China, without having any cross-border capital flow penalities (neoliberal globalism in a nutshell), then the major employers like Amazon and Walmart are going to have to double their w…

> Yes, that means less for the executives and shareholders. They may have to sell some of their properties, oh dear. Based on retail business profit margins, it would mean higher prices for customers. Not that that is a bad thing, less consumption would be great.

In the Metro NY and upstate regions, there is a supermarket chain called Shoprite that is unionized. Where I live, none of the other chains are union shops.

The only visible difference as a consumer is there are less (or no) automated checkout lanes. Prices are no different than anywhere else.

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#129

Post by DoughnutHole »

q1w2 wrote: post #85
jaclaz wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be wrong, but besides and before the wage increases, it seems to me like the priority would be for decent working conditions, if what is published from time to time on media is actually true, the biggest issues are about lack of (normal, decent) pauses or rest periods, continuous summoning for increases in productivity, total control on the workers, etc.

> if what is published from time to time on media is actually true That's a big IF. Unions were invented after the onset of the industrial revolution to combat truly unsafe work conditions in industrial settings where worker's dying was common. OSHA did away with all that. The current generation of "bad work condition" complaints is around getting adequate bathroom breaks.

This is pure historical revisionism concocted solely to diminish modern struggles for worker organisation.

Wages are and have always been the primary driver of unionising.

The main motivation was never mustache twirling capitalist charicatures shoveling children into furnaces as fuel or some other unambiguous evil that we have since banished. Conditions have always been part of the bargain, but the goal has always been first and foremost higher wages.

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#130

Post by SantalBlush »

q1w2 wrote: post #85
jaclaz wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be wrong, but besides and before the wage increases, it seems to me like the priority would be for decent working conditions, if what is published from time to time on media is actually true, the biggest issues are about lack of (normal, decent) pauses or rest periods, continuous summoning for increases in productivity, total control on the workers, etc.

> if what is published from time to time on media is actually true That's a big IF. Unions were invented after the onset of the industrial revolution to combat truly unsafe work conditions in industrial settings where worker's dying was common. OSHA did away with all that. The current generation of "bad work condition" complaints is around getting adequate bathroom breaks.

OSHA did away with all that on paper. In reality, OSHA compliance varies considerably across manual labor jobs. Here's how:

Suppose you're a manager/foreman. You never outright tell your staff to ignore safety regulations; you simply give them a huge workload with a deadline and set of equipment that make it impossible to feasibly accomplish the workload within compliance. Your workers catch on that in order to get the job done, they need to ignore the safety regs. As a manager, you look the other way as they ignore the rules. If an injury happens on the job, you then blame the worker for ignoring the safety regulations, which of course you instructed them to follow. Follow up by giving them a drug test so you might even be able to get out of paying them workers comp.

This is how it works in the real world. Source: seen it, done it.

Post reply on HN