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

321–330 of 403 posts

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

#321

Post by taurath »

_jal wrote: post #55
wahnfrieden wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

obviously amazon doesn't have a real case against unions, but they can try to use scary language to confuse people

"This will go down on your permanent record..." -- Bezos in helium voice I remember quitting from Krogers bagging groceries when I was a kid. I forget why, but I did give less than 2 weeks notice. Mr. Manager gravely conveyed that if I did this, I'd be barred from working for them again forever. Pretty sure my poker face then was not what it is now, but in any case I did not find that to be anywhere nearly as distres…

Earlier in my life I nearly died driving 50 miles to get into work as a grocery store clerk on no sleep because a manager called me and in no uncertain terms told me if I didn’t come in that day I’d be fired.

I was raised to believe that a job is more important than just about anything, so I decided to try to go in as I was out of town. I crashed my car as I fell asleep at the wheel. It shouldn’t take that to get someone to realize the relative unimportance of a job, but the US culture (as channeled through my conservative parents, at least) doesn’t value anything higher than work and productivity in the service of capital as this deified virtue.

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

#322

Post by 8note »

salawat wrote: post #256
SantalBlush wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

... So why didn't you push back and hold the manager foreman's feet to the fire for the scheduling if you knew it caused OSHA violations? If you do not push back against management, nothing changes, and unfortunately, to get anything provable in a court of law beyond he said she said... It has to be on paper/in an email. Go on. Text your boss you can't get the job done on his schedule without violating OSHA standards…

Where this comment is missing is how you pay rent after doing this

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

#323

Post by kennywinker »

the_only_law wrote: post #280
kennywinker wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this satire? It feels like satire. A perfect sendup of “both sides”-ism. If it’s not satire, I’ve only got one argument to offer: what are the odds that the advantages and disadvantages of both sides are equally balanced? Vanishingly small. So why would you “both sides” things when one is definitely going to be better. Figure out which side that is, and then advocate for it. That’s how progress happens.

> So why would you “both sides” things when one is definitely going to be better. Usually in an wish to maintain order and prevent chaotic conflict. Not going to explicitly say it's a good or bad thing, but that usually seems to be the intent.

You literally just did a “both-sides” to social change. “Maintaining order” is an act of violence when people’s lives are on the line. A specific social change is either good or bad, there’s no room for people to stand in the middle and obstruct because they can’t be bothered to figure out if they value the risk of change more than the damage of staying the same.

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

#324

Post by [deleted] »

seabird wrote: post #253
pastacacioepepe wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear, just read again. I don't claim to be an expert about Detroit's union history by the way. > Unions can be corrupted or do mistakes

>I don't claim to be an expert about Detroit's union history by the way. Industry in Detroit is a perfect example of what can happen when unions have way too much power. The current conversation really downplays how ridiculously powerful unions like the UAW were. It was effectively impossible to lose your job -- you would have line workers that would bring a portable TV to work and watch their work roll past them all…

[deleted]

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

#325

Post by tialaramex »

peyton wrote: post #207
resoluteteeth wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What employment contract? They’re at will Despite the colloquial use of the word "contract," there is generally always going to be an employment contract (agreement) in place. Similarly, people colloquially talk about having a "contract" for things like cellphones meaning a fixed term, but there is always an actual "contract" (agreement) with the terms of the service regardless of whether the plan has a fixed term…

Contract and agreement are not synonyms. Contracts require consideration.

But employment minus consideration is either:

If the worker isn't receiving consideration: Slavery, which is illegal in the civilised world (Americans still enslave convicted criminals...)

If the employer isn't receiving consideration: Some sort of payroll error? Are you mistakenly still paying people you fired? Call HR now.

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

#326

Post by mantas »

Varqu wrote: post #45
mantas wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much of that money is made by externalising costs to the society? Limiting cross-borders money flow is a very good way to keep social contract intact.

So basically, let's keep buying our average quality cars for more money, than allow free trade & importing better quality vehicles from a country that specializes with it? For some reason, it was the growth of global trade that coincided with the growth of global GDP & the increase of the life quality of the earth population.

Tax the shit out of imported cars and make sure that local makers actually compete.

It's funny how people cry about CO2 and whatnot. But when it's about trade, suddenly transporting stuff thousands of kilometers is fiiiine.

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

#327

Post by the_only_law »

kennywinker wrote: post #323
the_only_law wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So why would you “both sides” things when one is definitely going to be better. Usually in an wish to maintain order and prevent chaotic conflict. Not going to explicitly say it's a good or bad thing, but that usually seems to be the intent.

You literally just did a “both-sides” to social change. “Maintaining order” is an act of violence when people’s lives are on the line. A specific social change is either good or bad, there’s no room for people to stand in the middle and obstruct because they can’t be bothered to figure out if they value the risk of change more than the damage of staying the same.

No I answered a question. I very explicitly noted following the question I wasn't going to make specify judgement either way, not because "both sides" but to prevent over zealous users from trying to fight me on it as well as to keep the topic to what I've said as opposed to what people want me to have said so the they can enter their own tirade, which evidently failed.

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

#328

Post by mantas »

AdrianB1 wrote: post #47
mantas wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much of that money is made by externalising costs to the society? Limiting cross-borders money flow is a very good way to keep social contract intact.

Globalism is coming from the same people that also want open borders for immigration. Should borders be open or closed? (European here, I have no stance on that, Amazon has no retail presence in my country and immigration is almost zero here)

Closed, of course (european too). It destroys capitalist job market by kicking out floor from workers. People ain't willing to do a job for peanuts? How about raising a salary (and automation becoming feasible)? Nah, let's important people who will work for less.

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

#329

Post by dragonwriter »

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

At-will employees have an employment contract, just one that does not restrict causes of termination beyond those that are not impermissible under generally applicable employment law.

“But they didn't sign anything like a contract,” one might object.

They accepted an offer to do work of some specification for pay of some specification. Even if there was nothing in writing and no other explicit terms, that's sufficient to have a contract.

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

#330

Post by kennywinker »

mh- wrote: post #320
kennywinker wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People call the current National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) election system a secret ballot election—but in fact it's not like any democratic election held anywhere else in our society. It's really a management-controlled election process because corporations have all the power. They control the information workers can receive and routinely poison the process by intimidating, harassing, coercing and even firing p…

(That quote comes from the AFL-CIO, not Wikipedia editors, for the curious.)

Almost put that in, but it seemed like it was clear from the tone that it’s a quote. If that felt misleading I apologize
Post reply on HN