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

Amazon's Anti-Union Training Video [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 138 posts

Re: Amazon's Anti-Union Training Video [video]

#41

Post by 29athrowaway »

mc32 wrote: post #39
icxa wrote: post #4

Absurdity of this video aside, but I just wish there was room in today's political environment to discuss pros and cons to unions and non-unions. There are some pretty good examples of unions being corrupt, there are examples where unions work. There are examples where like Amazon says, having a direct relationship with your employer is the best. Nuance is gone which is the biggest loss.

Definitely. Unions brought progress in terms of worker rights, up to a point. They helped transform the landscape for all workers. But, like all big and complex organizations they become corrupted and rather than having the interest of workers and society as foremost goals, self perpetuation and preservation become the goals. Except for Bernie no other candidate explicitly and implicitly supports unions. All the othe…

> But, like all big and complex organizations they become corrupted and rather than having the interest of workers and society as foremost goals, self perpetuation and preservation become the goals.

The same can be said of corporations too.

Re: Amazon's Anti-Union Training Video [video]

#42

Post by mirimir »

zaroth wrote: post #40
mirimir wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's true that the legality of unions in the US depends on an exception in antitrust law. But it's also true that corporations depend on state-backed exceptions to common law. As such, corporations were generally illegal in the US until the late 1800s. There was an exception for corporations serving the public interest. Initially for building canals and railroads. But in the late 1800s, a series of Supreme Court opin…

Any form of business larger than a sole proprietorship is a collective action. The “corporate” form of a business (as supposed to a partnership or other structure) is mostly a matter of taxes, legal liability, and the manner of raising capital and distributing profits. Powerful unions are typically larger than the workforce of any one single company.

Right. Sole proprietorships and individual workers have similar market power. But without unions, workers have virtually no market power vs corporations (and partnerships, for that matter).

I do agree that both corporations and unions ought to be regulated by antitrust law.

Re: Amazon's Anti-Union Training Video [video]

#43

Post by sangnoir »

lr4444lr wrote: post #27
wrong_variable wrote: post #5

Organized labor was extremely problematic for capital since WW2. The new dealers ( FDR, Truman ) gave organized labor tremendous power because without it the USA would probably have had a big communist party. They also knew the deflationary period of the 1930s lead to the rise of fascism and nationalism in Europe. So the petty greed of capital was scarified at the altar to maintain peace. They were also willing to sa…

I don't think that is correct. My understanding of American union activity was that it was much less associated with communist movements than Europe, in large part because of its history with machine politics and various ethnic affinities. The real problem with American unions is its bloody fight against suppression in the late 19th century. American labor relations with management are war compared to Europe and Asia…

The Industrial Workers of the World (founded in Chicago, 1905) had very strong ties with socialism. Helen Keller was involved in both the Socialist Party and the IWW, but you won't find her political views on a motivational poster at your offices.

Re: Amazon's Anti-Union Training Video [video]

#44

Post by gigama »

lr4444lr wrote: post #21

YouTube comments are usually a cesspool, but sometimes a real gem makes it through, like this: > notices another worker says "grievance" > i was trained for this > i run to the hrm > i twist my ankle jumping over my piss bottles > i struggle to limp through the warehouse as the other workers have to push me over so the make their times. > i fall over from heat exhaustion because the hvac has never worked > finally at…

Or this one from Garmen Lin:

Why did Jeff Bezos get divorced? Because his marriage... was a union!!

Re: Amazon's Anti-Union Training Video [video]

#45

Post by mmcwilliams »

icxa wrote: post #4

Absurdity of this video aside, but I just wish there was room in today's political environment to discuss pros and cons to unions and non-unions. There are some pretty good examples of unions being corrupt, there are examples where unions work. There are examples where like Amazon says, having a direct relationship with your employer is the best. Nuance is gone which is the biggest loss.

At the same time, there should also be room to discuss the pretty good examples of employers being corrupt and even engaging in wage-fixing collusion against workers across companies within an industry. On this site there’s plenty of anti-worker sentiment and not enough discussion of the misdeeds [0] of the employers.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust...

Re: Amazon's Anti-Union Training Video [video]

#46

Post by Animats »

Similar info from "unionproof.org"[1]:

Managers may notice a change in the language of employees because it becomes more formal and legal in nature. Employees may start using union words like “grievance,” “arbitration,” “job security,” “employee rights,” “prevailing wage” and “unfair labor practices.” They may also start asking their immediate supervisor or manager questions around these topics, so be sure you have a system in place for your front-line managers to report a change in employee behavior that could be an indication of organizing activity.

"Union Proof Certification" is a thing.

The Communications Workers of America describes typical employer tactics from the labor side.[2]

Historically, neither side is very creative, so once you know what the standard moves are, you know what to expect.

[1] https://blog.unionproof.com/are-you-missing-these-10-signs-o...

[2] https://unionbustingplaybook.com

Re: Amazon's Anti-Union Training Video [video]

#47

Post by vore »

jasonhansel wrote: post #16

The best/worst parts: - Valuing innovation while saying that nothing should ever change in their relationships with employees - Using the words "vulnerability to organizing" and "dangers of organizing" as if it's a terrible disease - Saying that unionizing employees aren't displaying "normal behavior" - Calling the phrase "living wage" a warning sign - Refusing to explain why it is that employees might want to unioni…

I like how they claim they're not "anti-union" but also not "neutral": sounds like following a very within the letter of the law way to union bust without actually falling afoul of labor laws.

Re: Amazon's Anti-Union Training Video [video]

#48

Post by ckris »

mmcwilliams wrote: post #45
icxa wrote: post #4

Absurdity of this video aside, but I just wish there was room in today's political environment to discuss pros and cons to unions and non-unions. There are some pretty good examples of unions being corrupt, there are examples where unions work. There are examples where like Amazon says, having a direct relationship with your employer is the best. Nuance is gone which is the biggest loss.

At the same time, there should also be room to discuss the pretty good examples of employers being corrupt and even engaging in wage-fixing collusion against workers across companies within an industry. On this site there’s plenty of anti-worker sentiment and not enough discussion of the misdeeds [0] of the employers. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust...

There are plenty of issues that should be on the table when it comes to technology workers like equity arrangements, severance at high risk companies, systems for promotions, actual vacations, open source funding, health care between employment etc. The reason it won't happen isn't because there isn't cause, or that employees would suddenly sabotage the company, but that any such organization would be a politic force. Especially in a country like the US where there are only two parties as contenders and only 50% of the eligible population votes. It doesn't take that much to change the political landscape, which is why no one can be allowed to.

Companies view everything as a cost whether it is infrastructure, health care or rights. They lobby broadly to minimize those costs and to keep their own position. And that is unlikely to change. If there is any argument against unions it is that it is already too late. Unions ultimately work by having a war chest for strikes. The company, or the employer organization, then have their own war chest. Tech companies have so much cash, and the cost of living is so high, that a strike wouldn't even be thinkable for many many years. Making an effective union impossible.

Re: Amazon's Anti-Union Training Video [video]

#50

Post by jart »

noego wrote: post #24
icxa wrote: post #4

Absurdity of this video aside, but I just wish there was room in today's political environment to discuss pros and cons to unions and non-unions. There are some pretty good examples of unions being corrupt, there are examples where unions work. There are examples where like Amazon says, having a direct relationship with your employer is the best. Nuance is gone which is the biggest loss.

> I just wish there was room in today's political environment to discuss pros and cons to unions and non-unions I agree with this from both perspectives. Companies and business-owners should also be allowed to espouse anti-union arguments without automatically being tagged as "evil" or subjected to extra scrutiny. That said, you're certainly not going to find a nuanced debate in a ... training video. The purpose of t…

Amazon never espoused anti-union views, so how could anyone accuse them of being evil? It is however Amazon's firmly held belief that a union-free environment will maximize benefits for its shareholders, customers, and associates (in that order).
Post reply on HN