Live data from Hacker News

Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions

npr.org

361–370 of 468 posts

Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions

#361
post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t have to be secret, just your membership is secret. It can have open plan offices in a cool neighborhood, pay politicians and all. Just have centralized Emlpoyers information management system where information about employers, like salaries they pay business they do, the good and the bad to work there etc. So when you are getting a job you apply to your not-union and they tell you what to expect and how mu…

Then the companies begin to fire employees that they find are part of this system and hire organizations like the Pinkertons to infiltrate and destroy your business resource system.

They can fight back, of course but trying to destroy another company’s systems sounds super illegal.

Fine, throw a bug bounty program.

Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions

#362
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the people who are forced to work in Amazon's warehouses with terrible working conditions don't have that luxury. Who is forced to work in Amazon's warehouses? Is Amazon rounding up people with guns everyday to make them work there?

Please. It's the only option available to a lot of people anymore especially with COVID shutdowns but it's part of a larger shift to a knowledge-economy. There aren't many jobs for unskilled workers anymore and getting skills is too expensive for the poor. Ignoring that reality is ridiculous and only proves you don't argue in good faith.

Getting the credentials is too expensive. Skills are nearly free. Most industries run on credentials. It's an important distinction.

Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions

#363
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What tactics are ok for a company to use to combat unions if it doesn't want them? They don't have a right to combat them at all. Union organizing is literally a human right. Of course ownership doesn't want them -- the feelings of ownership are (supposed to be) irrelevant.

It really amazes me what some people think qualifies for a “human right”. If you are paying someone and they are doing something you told them not to do isn’t it your “human right” to stop paying them? Where do you draw the line with what a “human right” is?

If Mr. Bezos wants to operate a business in a country, he needs to follow its laws. If he doesn't like them, he can take his business somewhere else.

Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions

#364
post #96
post #4

It just astounds me that the Old Timey Pinkertons are still around, to be honest. That is a company that my 98 year old grandfather tells stories about from his childhood. I know there are other old companies, but Pinkerton is one of those that just sounds old fashioned.

Those stories are also told in a video game called "Red Dead Redemption." Stories might be fictional, but the agency is very real.

They tried to cease-and-desist Rockstar, actually.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2019-04-11-take-two-r...

Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions

#366
post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If given a free choice of literally anything they could do to contribute to the world, do you think Amazon warehouse employees would put Amazon warehouse work as their primary choice? Something they said they wanted to do "when they grow up"? "Something with dehumanising conditions, please!" If not, what is your answer to the quesiton "why are they doing this job at all"? Because they have to do something, and this i…

So by offering an alternative better than any other available, Amazon is the bad guy? What about all the companies not offering them alternatives?

They used to offer them alternatives but Amazon put those companies out of business. The idea that it’s Amazon or homelessness doesn’t really make Amazon look better.

Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions

#367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is even more unenforceable than the 4th amendment.

It still has value even if enforcement is imperfect and selective.

In the real world, "rights" are not inalienable. I mean, who among the lower classes wrote the US constitution? Not a single one. That's because it was written by the bourgeoisie who were protecting their interests.

Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions

#368

I'm a brit, can someone give me an overview of the law on US unions? If one forms, are Amazon compelled to work with them like in European nations? If its still just At Will employment, I don't see how a union would make any difference there, Amazon can (will) just fire everyone who joins and replace them tomorrow right?

Interfering with a union or the formation of a union are explicitly illegal. This includes firing someone for trying to organize, at-will employment or no. However, this doesn't keep employers from trying, or from retaliation using pretextual explanations to avoid penalties. It's also common for employers to force employees to watch anti-union propaganda. Much of the overall culture in the US, as well, has turned hostile to unions.

State and federal law have been growing increasingly hostile to unions. Since 1910, if a union is formed by way of a majority vote of the employees, then they are required to represent all employees, whether or not they pay dues. Many states, including New York, California, and most "blue" states, allow "union shops", requiring all employees to pay dues whether or not they choose to join. But many, including most "red" states, have "Right to Work" laws banning union shops and allowing only "open shops". Any employee can therefore benefit from a union without contributing to it. The immediate free-rider problem cripples labor organization in those states. The problem is compounded by manufacturers moving their production to RtW states to save on labor costs. Boeing, for example, has moved much of its production from Washington, where its employees are unionized, to South Carolina, where they aren't. Membership has fallen from 20% in 1984 to 10% in 2018. Moreover, the Supreme Court ruled in 2018 that unionized public sector jobs must all be open shops, overturning a 1977 decision. That covers about half of the country's membership, so we can expect it to weaken labor even more in the years to come.

The overall result is that the power of organized labor is a pale shadow of what it was in the mid-20th century.

Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions

#369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really amazes me what some people think qualifies for a “human right”. If you are paying someone and they are doing something you told them not to do isn’t it your “human right” to stop paying them? Where do you draw the line with what a “human right” is?

If Mr. Bezos wants to operate a business in a country, he needs to follow its laws. If he doesn't like them, he can take his business somewhere else.

Easier just to change the law.

Re: Amazon reportedly has Pinkerton agents surveil workers who try to form unions

#370
post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To the advantage of union organisers, mass communication and organisation is a lot easier today. But that's a double-edged sword. It's also an advantage to employers and businesses . And recent history has shown they have the advantage: they been successful at thwarting union formation (see Wal-Mart, the movie American Factory, etc.) and even labor laws (e.g. Prop 22).

Well if you thwart union formation and legislation by using communication to persuade people that you're right and to vote for your side, that's called democracy.

> Well if you thwart union formation and legislation by using communication to persuade people that you're right and to vote for your side, that's called democracy.

That's neither here nor there. The point I was disputing was the idea that changes in mass communication technology gives an advantage to unions.

However, to your point: your phrasing "using communication to persuade people...to vote for your side, that's called democracy," obscures some important distinctions. If your success at persuasion stems mainly from the greater power you have to project your message (e.g. via wealth), then that's arguably not actually very democratic. That's pretty easy to see when greater political power is used (e.g. the CCP suppressing dissenting voices and successfully persuading the people with a thick blanket of weakly-opposed propaganda), but there's a similar dynamic when one side can greatly outspend its opponent, since wealth is a kind of power [1].

For a union vote, the employer typically has both greater wealth and greater political power: it can blanket the workplace with anti-union messages and require employees to repeatedly attend anti-union "education" sessions during work hours (which is typical before a union vote), while the union organizers have much more limited access, and must try to reach employees outside of work.

[1] this is an area of tension in liberal democracy, where trade-offs need to be made.

Post reply on HN