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

Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 458 posts

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#161

Post by Ar-Curunir »

Accujack wrote: post #25
anoxor wrote: post #16

Having been a part of a union I was mandated to enter when I took the job until the supreme court ruled that wasn't legal, actual unions are a far cry from how they are portrayed as helping the worker. I would honestly do anything in my power to not have to work in a union again. They are set up as antagonistic between administration and workers, and adds a layer of bureaucracy that I've only seen be negative. I've w…

Some people like unions, I think because they're lucky enough to have had a good experience, or to be part of a union that was not decayed by age or special interests. Unions should not be needed... the governments who represent the people working should provide the necessary protections for workers without unions being needed. Unions are a way for some people to get what all workers should have by default.

The average person doesn't have any power over their government. You know who does? Their employers. Given this power imbalance, who exactly do you expect the government to "represent"?

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#162

Post by umvi »

sudosysgen wrote: post #146
umvi wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Never going to happen, there will always be a point where the company will try to minimize worker salaries as far as it can get away with. I disagree. Not every company is public, first of all. So not every company is beholden to shareholders who demand endless growth at any cost. There are lots of private companies that are content with the size they are at, and with the revenue they are generating and aren't temp…

But that's not the issue. The issue is competition. Eventually, you have to cut costs in order to be competitive even if you're very nice, and if you read business administration textbooks cutting employee compensation is often the primary way.

Ok, so then how does a unionized company stay competitive if it isn't allowed to cut costs by reducing employee compensation? You are suggesting only unions know the effective secret methods of cutting costs that business-textbook-writers are unaware of?

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#163

Post by heavyset_go »

MrStonedOne wrote: post #59
xnyan wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you agree that there are some corrupt market-based economies in our world? Would you say that the fact that there are corrupt and inefficient market-based economies means that all market-based economies result in negative outcomes? Saying that support of organized labor = support of corrupt unions is a pretty weak strawman.

I could ask you the same question, about unions. What I love are unions that set abnormally high union initiation fees, only offer payment plans on people who sign dues check off forms, then include language in that dues check off form that keeps you from cancelling it unless you do so during a 15 day window every year. As long as unions can forced on empolyees, unions can not be a market-based economy, it can not ev…

> As long as unions can forced on empolyees

Nobody is forcing you to work a union job. You're free to take a non-union job or quit at any point.

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#164

Post by 52-6F-62 »

dylan604 wrote: post #60
ancorevard wrote: post #31

I've not seen good come out of unions in decades. Example of unions that are net negative for society: police unions, teacher unions.

I have lots of friends in the "movie making" business. Lots of crew members like camera department, set construction, etc. Before Obama care, the only way these folks could afford health insurance was to join the union. Even my actor friends have used the medical coverage as their sole reason. They are not looking to be SAG members for SAG work (we're in Texas so not necessary), but use it for the other benefits. It'…

> Otherwise, I think unions have way more power than what they need at this time. Now, they have to do things to justify their existence.

Unions have long offered things like group health insurance, and other benefits. I'm not sure what you mean since those are not new offerings.

Aside: Union membership has been on the decline for decades, not increasing in power.

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#166

Post by grecy »

baron816 wrote: post #159

I don’t know why this is even controversial. American style unions are bad for business, plain and simple. And Amazon is legally required to put the interests of its investors first. Amazon is going to be doing whatever it can to discourage unionization, that’s just what’s going to happen, and I find it hard to blame them.

> American style unions are bad for business, plain and simple

They're not bad for business, they reduce profits, and they limit the ability of a company to exploit it's workers.

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#167

Post by rxhernandez »

reading-at-work wrote: post #17

Not surprised. Tech companies (Facebook and Google in this case, and probably others) have been known to retain Pinkerton agents to monitor employees. Yes, those Pinkertons. “Among other services, Pinkerton offers to send investigators to coffee shops or restaurants near a company’s campus to eavesdrop on employees’ conversations.” https://newrepublic.com/article/147619/pinkertons-still-neve...

In general, it's not a good idea to talk poorly about your employer in public if you want to keep your job; I've heard of at least a couple cases where someone was fired for "mouthing-off" to their spouse in a public place like a grocery store.

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#168

Post by rumanator »

MrStonedOne wrote: post #83
AlexandrB wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what does that make corporations with more than 1 location?

Each location should have its own union, grouping them all up allows the needs of the few to get drowned out by the wants of the many, and elevates union leadership to a position of power over the workers as union reps have easier access to spread their messaging to employees across locations while normal employees can only organize within their location.

> (...) and elevates union leadership to a position of power over the workers as union reps

I don't understand your point. Do you believe that this so called risk of an elected representative getting more power than the people that elected him is overall worse than the people having absolutely no power or representation?

I mean, can you explain why in your view leaving an employee SOL is more desirable than ensuring he has some say?

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#169

Post by dcre »

baron816 wrote: post #159

I don’t know why this is even controversial. American style unions are bad for business, plain and simple. And Amazon is legally required to put the interests of its investors first. Amazon is going to be doing whatever it can to discourage unionization, that’s just what’s going to happen, and I find it hard to blame them.

Maybe it's controversial because it's blatantly illegal under the National Labor Relations Act.

https://twitter.com/MattBruenig/status/1300856270572916736

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#170

Post by grecy »

wnevets wrote: post #78

Whenever unions are mentioned on HN there always seems to be a coordinated effort to attack them in the comments, very interesting.

The same happens whenever anything is discussed that would actually improve the lives of the very vast majority of Americans - healthcare improvements, UBI, tertiary education that isn't crippling debt, unions, better public transport, etc.

There are extremely rich and powerful people who will sink hundreds of billions of dollars into making sure those things don't change.

America is just so profitable the way it is.

Post reply on HN