Amazon recently opened up in Sweden.
According to this (Danish)
https://fagbladet3f.dk/artikel/svenske-amazon-arbejdere-faar...
the workers are in an union.
Amazon's anti-union site for its Alabama warehouse
31–40 of 204 posts
Re: Amazon's anti-union site for its Alabama warehouse
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're asserting causality based on very few data points. The US auto industry is still very union-based, and beyond the occasional bailout, seems to be doing well. Moreover, plenty of industries that didn't become dominated by unions also became uncompetitive. You say that "those working for the media are all unionized" but I have no idea what you're talking about. Citation? Unionization does not cure bad management…
I cannot prove causality, but I think common sense dictates here. Everything we know about economics tells us that inhibiting contract liberty in the way that labor laws do in order to give unions monopolistic control over the negotiating power of a company's work force will be economically harmful and an objective review of US economic history validates that. >>The US auto industry is still very union-based, and bey…
> you are introducing top-down control and limiting the free market that is so effective at coordinating large numbers of people to better meet their collective needs
I can't believe you're saying that with a straight face, talking about Jeff Bezzos' company, after covid and 2020.
Re: Amazon's anti-union site for its Alabama warehouse
#33This seems like the most mundane anti union campaign. Other times there are veiled threats about "competitiveness" and work allocation and such.
Amazon: "Don't pay $500 in dues"
Their main argument is that it is not worth the money.
Re: Amazon's anti-union site for its Alabama warehouse
#34Why is blatant union suppression like this even allowed?
I think we should keep asking that question about everything spoken or printed that someone, somewhere might potentially disagree with or find objectionable. Free speech means freedom from disagreement and objection. So all speech should be approved ("allowed") by the proper authorities before being able to be communicated. Free speech is restricted speech.
Re: Amazon's anti-union site for its Alabama warehouse
#35Genuine question:
From Amazon's perspective unions are strictly a net-loss. Even if the unions offered the employees zero advantages, the same paychecks from Amazon would have less impact on workers because of dues/meetings, so you'd expect moderately higher attrition and other negative effects.
On the flip side though, is it actually clear that an Amazon union _would_ benefit workers once accounting for the overhead? Is that even the goal, or are prospective Amazon unions just trying to improve safety levels to something on par with other warehouses? Are there other factors?
Re: Amazon's anti-union site for its Alabama warehouse
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're asserting causality based on very few data points. The US auto industry is still very union-based, and beyond the occasional bailout, seems to be doing well. Moreover, plenty of industries that didn't become dominated by unions also became uncompetitive. You say that "those working for the media are all unionized" but I have no idea what you're talking about. Citation? Unionization does not cure bad management…
I cannot prove causality, but I think common sense dictates here. Everything we know about economics tells us that inhibiting contract liberty in the way that labor laws do in order to give unions monopolistic control over the negotiating power of a company's work force will be economically harmful and an objective review of US economic history validates that. >>The US auto industry is still very union-based, and bey…
> inhibiting contract liberty
Alabama is a right-to-work state, so how is a union inhibiting contract liberty? You legally cannot be forced in Alabama to pay union dues if you don't want to be part of a union.
Of course, an industry might decide not to work with people who are outside of the union, but an industry might also choose not to hire anyone who refuses to sign arbitration and/or anticompete agreements, and I'd wager you probably think those contracts are the results of free choices from all players.
So by the same logic, a voluntary union in a right-to-work state is the result of voluntary contracts and decisions made by people who vote to join the union and by businesses that freely decide to work with that union in order to access that workforce. You might not like the outcome of those negotiations, but a group of people deciding to collectively accept or reject a contract is contract liberty. Of course they should have the freedom to make that decision.
I understand some of the union objections in states where employees can be forced to join and/or pay dues against their will, but people act like collective bargaining is fundamentally anti-freedom, and I just don't understand that point of view at all. What is a collective bargaining agreement other than another contract that people have the freedom to sign?
> Tesla is doing great, and its workforce is not unionized.
By what definition? There have been multiple articles and accounts describing Tesla's factories as awful places to work, and its management tried to pressure its workers to ignore COVID restrictions.
Sure, if the only thing you're optimizing for is profit, then any attempt to increase employee bargaining power is going to be a problem, because all of them will reduce profit. But Tesla seems to be largely failing the "is this what we want a modern factory/workplace to look like" test.
----
Edit, addressing your points:
> We're talking about the strength of industry here. By that standard, Tesla is doing great.
That's a very vague definition -- I wouldn't say that Tesla is producing wildly better cars than everyone else on the market. They're certainly very profitable, but if you're only thinking about profit marging and stock price, then you're going to end up opposing literally anything that improves worker conditions in any way.
> The Biden administration is planning to get rid of right to work:
And your solution to that is to oppose people's rights to collectively bargain? Again, I understand some of the objections you might have around union regulations, but you're still not arguing for free contracts if you're throwing the concept out entirely. I mean, arguably even right-to-work laws themselves are anti-free-contract, I know Libertarians who hold that view because those contracts bar what contracts an employer can sign with a union.
If you have objections about federal laws, fine, but that's not the problem of the current workers who want to collectively bargain with Amazon. They shouldn't have to give up their collective bargaining rights just because you have an issue with the federal regulations, they still at a fundamental level have the right to unionize.
Take it up with Biden, don't complain about the workers.
Re: Amazon's anti-union site for its Alabama warehouse
#37This is another reminder that we have some of the negative aspects of a cyberpunk future without the cool empowering hacking parts. I wonder about the sort of person who would design such a website. Surely you'd have to be dead inside to create such an abomination, even if it's just a job? I am not trying to be hyperbolic here.
It's not difficult to find many regular people who hate unions vehemently. I would be angry too is someone spoke in my name without my consent.
Re: Amazon's anti-union site for its Alabama warehouse
#38Amazon warehouses are one of the few reasons, I think we can all agree, that a union has a place. There is the argument to be made that if someone doesn't like the job, go elsewhere, it's the free market. True, but I see a lot of these fulfillment centers in small towns. They become a major employer, sometimes eclipsing even the local Walmart. It's a place where jobs are hard to come by, so maybe Amazon offers someth…
>>. It's a place where jobs are hard to come by, so maybe Amazon offers something the desperate, the poor, and the struggling something they can't get elsewhere. If you make it illegal to provide bad jobs, those jobs will not be substituted one-for-one for good jobs. That's not how an economy works. You're only hurting low-skilled workers by mandating higher minimum work standards. Responding to below: Yes, every so-…
You can make this argument about literally any labor protection. “You’re only hurting people desperate for work by mandating safety requirements.” “You’re only hurting poor families by banning child labor.”
Re: Amazon's anti-union site for its Alabama warehouse
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're asserting causality based on very few data points. The US auto industry is still very union-based, and beyond the occasional bailout, seems to be doing well. Moreover, plenty of industries that didn't become dominated by unions also became uncompetitive. You say that "those working for the media are all unionized" but I have no idea what you're talking about. Citation? Unionization does not cure bad management…
I cannot prove causality, but I think common sense dictates here. Everything we know about economics tells us that inhibiting contract liberty in the way that labor laws do in order to give unions monopolistic control over the negotiating power of a company's work force will be economically harmful and an objective review of US economic history validates that. >>The US auto industry is still very union-based, and bey…
> They increase that negotiating power by preventing the employer from negotiating with the larger labor pool. It is a zero sum gain that enables unionized workers to extract economic rent.
Such rent as sick leave, holidays, weekends, basic health insurance (US), ...? That rent?
Re: Amazon's anti-union site for its Alabama warehouse
#40Wow. Just...wow. Maybe the line with the worst rhetorical trick is this bullshit in the "joining a union" FAQ: "Q: Will a union provide better wages and benefits? A: A union cannot guarantee better wages and benefits. With union negotiations, you could end up with more, the same.... or less than what you make today." I love that because it works exactly as well when you just negate the question: "Q: Will NOT having a…
There is an asymmetry because the union collects a due even if the fail to do the wage negotiation.