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

Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 415 posts

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#371

Post by OtterCoder »

yostrovs wrote: post #306
awiesenhofer wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He could live almost anywhere in the world: "The United States, Suriname, Papua New Guinea, and several island countries in the Pacific Ocean are the only countries that do not require employers to provide paid time off for new parents." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_leave

Glad to know that North Korea, Guatemala, Sudan, and South Sudan are considerate enough to provide paid maternity leave.

> North Korea

That's not terribly surprising, fascist ideologies are typically very family-centric, to the point of actual Darwinism/eugenics.

It's one more reason why I don't think the rising, bipartisan, hyper-capitalist, reactionary tide in the US can be accurately called fascism. It's a different creature in a lot of ways.

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#372

Post by [deleted] »

yostrovs wrote: post #306
awiesenhofer wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He could live almost anywhere in the world: "The United States, Suriname, Papua New Guinea, and several island countries in the Pacific Ocean are the only countries that do not require employers to provide paid time off for new parents." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_leave

Glad to know that North Korea, Guatemala, Sudan, and South Sudan are considerate enough to provide paid maternity leave.

[deleted]

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#373

Post by bena »

jimmy1 wrote: post #370
bena wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have a lot of "clever" diminutives for things they don't like for nebulous reasons they can't actually articulate. It makes me question the thoughts of anyone who consistently uses them in an argument or rant. It feels as if the speaker is more interested in scoring laughs than making any point.

> People have a lot of "clever" diminutives for things they don't like for nebulous reasons they can't actually articulate. I shop at Whole Foods quite frequently. There isn't some conspiracy or nefarious intent in calling Whole Foods "Whole Paycheck" -- it's usually used amongst Whole Foods shoppers between themselves when they describe their shopping experience (...in my experience) If it is still tough for you to…

I know the superficial reason why it's called that.

It's done in either self-deprecating jest or as an insult.

To consistently use the diminutive rather than the actual name is to signal to others that you are "in" somehow. That you are "the same". Depending on the manner in which you use it, indicates which group you're looking to belong to. Using these terms and also going full alphabet soup, which happens when people talk shop, isn't for the purpose of disseminating information, but to tell people you are informed.

If you want people to understand you, you should be clear and simple.

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#374

Post by OtterCoder »

zero_intp wrote: post #313
alkonaut wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry yes I mean "lay off" (edited). With cause obviously you can fire anyone.

'layed off' means different things in the US versus Europe. In the US, an employer may 'lay off' as much staff as they want and then hire new people into those positions. In France, for example, a 'lay off' must close the position and not hire a new body into that role for 12-24 months. This may be difficult to prove, but the laws exist.

Wow, I actually really like the French policy. It would make employers actually distinguish between a temp position and a full hire up front. Too many small businesses try to optimistically hire in good times, only to suddenly realize a few months later that they would collapse under the new payroll when business is normal.

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#375

Post by therealdrag0 »

u-r-a-scab wrote: post #324
zdragnar wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It worked well enough for me when I was younger, though I wasn't living in SF.

younger is the key word there.

What's wrong with providing low wage entry level jobs for young people? It gives them experience. Rising wages would incentivize employees to stay in low-skill jobs for longer instead of moving to higher-skill-higher-pay jobs and letting other young people get those low skill jobs.

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#376

Post by anothergoogler »

bena wrote: post #373
jimmy1 wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People have a lot of "clever" diminutives for things they don't like for nebulous reasons they can't actually articulate. I shop at Whole Foods quite frequently. There isn't some conspiracy or nefarious intent in calling Whole Foods "Whole Paycheck" -- it's usually used amongst Whole Foods shoppers between themselves when they describe their shopping experience (...in my experience) If it is still tough for you to…

I know the superficial reason why it's called that. It's done in either self-deprecating jest or as an insult. To consistently use the diminutive rather than the actual name is to signal to others that you are "in" somehow. That you are "the same". Depending on the manner in which you use it, indicates which group you're looking to belong to. Using these terms and also going full alphabet soup, which happens when peo…

"Whole Paycheck" isn't a diminutive, perhaps you were thinking of pejorative? Either way, I think you're reading a bit much into it.

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#377

Post by coldtea »

gameswithgo wrote: post #346
lordlimecat wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should either clarify that you are talking about unpaid leave, or you should read your own articles. Maternity leave is guaranteed for most employees under FMLA. >They can find 100 ways to fire you in ways that don't break the letter of the law if you ask for something the law supposedly guarantees. That can be actionable too. If you are pregnant and they fire you, they are opening themselves up to so much liabil…

normal people don't have the time or knowledge to begin those kinds of proceedings.

Or the money to see them through... not to mention in smaller cities they can also be blacklisted (illegal or not, happens all the time to those asking for their rights, suing employees, looking to unionize, etc).

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#378

Post by pluto9 »

noobermin wrote: post #227
chrissnell wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're in the middle of the best economy in years. Why would a worker put up with that? Go someplace else. Whole Foods doesn't put stores in small towns. Anyone who works there has plenty of other options.

There have been umpteen articles how wages have not kept up with inflation. It's a tough sell telling parts of the country that swapped the first black president for man with a less than stellar morality record that this is the best economy in history.

> swapped the first black president for man with a less than stellar morality record

This is a weird juxtaposition. You appear to be implying that "first black president" and "less than stellar morality" are moral opposites.

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#379

Post by Frondo »

spacehome wrote: post #368
xg15 wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Employers are not and should not be required to pay you for work you are not doing. Most other developed countries seem to see that slightly differently. But ok, it is a stance you can discuss - however, it becomes enormously cynical when combined with the conservative aversion against welfare rights: So you're pregnant or sick and happen to not have enough resources to live from savings for a few months. If neithe…

"Welfare rights"?! That's a great neologism. It's now a right to take other people's paychecks?

Yes, that is what a society is; we all work to support one another in one way or another.

The only real question is what that support looks like. For most of the Western world, it includes things like paying women for maternity leave, and not complaining or acting like this is a big controversial idea.

Re: Whole Foods workers seek to unionize

#380

Post by Frondo »

spacehome wrote: post #367
grasshopperpurp wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why we can't have nice things.

I agree. Yet people keep voting for socialism.

The contemporary American conservative's use of the word "socialism" seems so meaning-free, it's a stand-in for "things I don't like" or "whatever libtards want".

Can you elaborate on what socialism you think people are voting for?

Cause right now we don't have free education--we have massive loans we award to children that can never be disposed of.

We don't have free health care--we have the worst of both possible systems, with only now a real national discussion about bringing our horrible health care in line with literally the rest of the western world.

Where's this socialism people keep voting for, and when's it going to start reaching us and affecting our lives in a meaningful way???

Post reply on HN