Live data from Hacker News

Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

techcrunch.com

191–200 of 415 posts

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#191
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have trouble getting on board with your opinion about their dedication because Whole Foods stores across the country have some of the best and most consistent customer service experiences I've had. I'd say there's no doubt they are more dedicated than most retail workers. The real question for me is if they are worth $15/hr? I don't know the business, so I can't say with any certainty there.

Amazon is a trillion dollar company. There is no reason they can't pay $15/hour.

$15/hour for 560K full-time employees would be $17B/year. Amazon shares are somehow a $1T commodity for speculators but the actual business clears $3B/year, so depending on how much of their SG&A today is labor they might truly be unable to sustain it.

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#192
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you'd be fired because no one else lives in the world you've created in your head.

Guess what? You create more business by not annoying your customers and providing awesome service. These poor attempts at annoying your customers means you will have less of them.

Customer satisfaction improvements cost money, which drives up prices, which loses customers. The highest customer satisfaction results tend to be associated with luxury brands.

The wisdom of annoyances that increase profit-per-customer yet lose some customers all depends on if it results in a net gain or a loss.

The mobile game ecosystem (pay-to-win) and the dominant web content model (ads) both suggest that some degree of annoyance is the more popular path.

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#193
All my experience shopping at grocery chains in the US and elsewhere has impressed upon me that these workers represent the absolute classic, textbook case for unionization.

Yes, including Whole Paycheck[0] as well as Trader Joe's and Safeway and Von's and everybody else.

While I can imagine Amazon having a loathing of unions, if they really want to be in this space they will sooner or later have to contend with the fact that this is an industry that needs a union. And I think, at obvious risk of being wrong, that the US is going to become once again more union-friendly in the coming years.

So maybe a very friendly, not very confrontational, laid-back and smiley group of workers flirting with unionization might be a way for Amazon to put a toe in that water without overcommitting. Much as the WholeFoods acquisition was per se.

[0]: Whole Foods goes by this nickname in California. Because you spend your...

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#194
post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the point; you don't get awards for purposefully and repeatedly violating company policy on a hunch that the customers prefer it. And you're actually validating Amazon's policy: you're annoyed and yet you're still both a Prime member and a WF client, which means they lost nothing by annoying you.

For business "annoyance" is like a hidden debt that keeps accumulating until it reaches a threshold where they have to pay for the whole amount.

Very true.

I just cancelled my prime account after multiple "annoyances" of packages not coming in 3 days, being dropped at the post office instead and getting delayed a day, and the straw that broke the camel's back - no compensation for missed delivery dates. I had to twist an agent's arm like crazy to get a month of prime.

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#196
post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Welcome!"¹. It is pointless. All I want is lunch. Yeesh. If that bugs you then... just lighten up. Most people aren't anti-social to such an extreme. You're the odd man out here, not the rest of humanity.

rest of the US Most of the world doesn’t have the bizarre forced scripted friendliness in customer service that the US has. People are allowed to be polite or friendly in their own personal way.

I was shocked at how obviously insincere servers were when I first went to the US - at least in my home country sure you get grumps but when someone gives good service it feels like a connection with them... not a faux polite scripted exchange.

I prefer it - but fast food countries value consistency over higher highs and lower lows.

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#197
"In a statement provided to TechCrunch, a representative of Whole Foods said they respect the “individual rights of [their] team members.”"

Ha... now there's a carefully chosen phrase.

“[We] have an open-door policy that encourages team members to bring their comments, questions and concerns directly to their team leaders,”

I'd refer to this gif[0] but I know they're not serious. If anyone believes individual cashiers asking for maternity leave is a good way to get it, I've got a bridge you might also be interested in buying.

0: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3AkXJmV0AIY/T_Yj4_zOF7I/AAAAAAAAAJ...

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I quit donating to charity after I found out that Red Cross only gives a small fraction of its donations to charity the rest is spent on Administration costs. Just like colleges and the healthcare industry. Got to pay all those vp's of vp's of vp's.

You quit donating to charity because one specific charity is egregiously bad? Isn't that a bit like ceasing to eat because you had something yucky once?

... one specific charity was accused of doing something bad.

The Red Cross is frequently accused of having excessive management costs and mismanaging funds; if you do a little research (a) they appear to have reasonable overhead (b) a lot of the accusations seem to come from competing charities with higher overheads.

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you joking? This is Amazon, the company where warehouse workers have to pick an item with so little time, they have to jog around the warehouse. Workers urinating in bottles because using the bathroom during non breaks = termination. Oh, and those breaks last exactly 14 minutes and 59 seconds, because anything after is Bezos' time, and you will be reprimanded. While he is one of the richest people in the world, c…

> Unions should quite obviously have formed by now. Including the eng team. But the problem with unions is that over time they are corrupted, and quickly become inefficient bureaucratic institutions. I agree with your sentiment, but the reality is far murkier than that.

This is equally an argument against forming any organization, isn't it?

Michels' classic Political Parties is a fascinating and depressing look at that problem. This stuff, problems with democracy, was fretted over 100 years ago, not so much nowadays, since democracy was redefined as what is called 'democracy' in the mid 20th C.[0]

"The iron law of oligarchy is a political theory, first developed by Michels in his 1911 book, Political Parties. It asserts that rule by an elite, or oligarchy, is inevitable as an "iron law" within any democratic organization as part of the "tactical and technical necessities" of organization.

Michels's theory states that all complex organizations, regardless of how democratic they are when started, eventually develop into oligarchies. Since no sufficiently large and complex organization can function purely as a direct democracy, power within an organization will always get delegated to individuals within that group, elected or otherwise.

Using anecdotes from political parties and trade unions struggling to operate democratically, Michels addressed the application of this law to representative democracy, stating "Who says organization, says oligarchy." ... "Historical evolution mocks all the prophylactic measures that have been adopted for the prevention of oligarchy."

All organizations eventually come to be run by a "leadership class", who often function as paid administrators, executives, spokespersons or political strategists for the organization. Far from being "servants of the masses", this "leadership class," rather than the organization's membership, will inevitably grow to dominate the organization's power structures. By controlling who has access to information, those in power can centralize their power successfully, often with little accountability, due to the apathy and non-participation most rank-and-file members have in relation to their organization's decision-making processes. Democratic attempts to hold leaders accountable fail, since with power comes the ability to reward loyalty, and the ability to both control information about the organization and what procedures the organization follows when making decisions. All of these mechanisms can be used to strongly influence the outcome of any decisions made 'democratically' by members." [1] (lightly abridged)

[0] see Michael Saward, Democracy [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy

Post reply on HN