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

Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 458 posts

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#401

Post by terr-dav »

valas wrote: post #388
tehjoker wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone that likes the New Deal should thank the union organizers and socialists that literally had to fight police in the streets to force the hand of the state. A large enough faction of the capitalists back then agreed to reforms because they feared things were going the way of revolution. In the 1930s, the 1917 revolution in Russia was a recent memory that scared the piss out of them. Bezos would like to continu…

"read some Marx"... do you have some book in mind? Perhaps some good summary? I hear Capital is hard to parse. So far my experience in trying to distill Marx is that he did reasonable assessment of the state of affairs at the time (i.e. identifying main classes in society of 1800s), but then his prescriptions of what to do (socialize means of production) did not work out anywhere. Maybe I'm reading wrong books.

Wage Labour and Captital

I haven't read through it yet, but it's relatively short, and it was recommended to me as a good starter.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/wag...

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#402

Post by YetAnotherNick »

GavinMcG wrote: post #310
YetAnotherNick wrote: post #287

I am surprised from the reactions here. What is the best way to deal with worker union blackmails according to you? I know people like to portray worker and amazon as good guy and bad guy, but I think most of us has seen some demands that are pretty outrageous from them. I think it is best if both sides have contact person with whom they can negotiate. Don't get me wrong, I think worker unions are essential for pushi…

Unions don't end up with outright control over business. Generally speaking, companies and unions do continue to negotiate throughout the term of a contract, which negotiations are formalized in Memoranda of Understanding. And during contract negotiations, if negotiations over a particular issue stall, the law empowers companies to make a "last and final" offer, which is then included in the contract presented to the…

Yes, that's why amazon is hiring people who are expert in negotiations.

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#403

Post by refurb »

dcre wrote: post #370
refurb wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gathering information on union organizing is illegal? I don’t think so. Spying, yes, but I don’t see that in the description. And your Twitter post is gone.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3azegw/amazon-is-spying-o...

Well if those allegations are true, then Amazon is gonna have some 'splainin' to do to the NLRB.

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#404

Post by terr-dav »

dantheman wrote: post #323
celticninja wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they offenders were arrested, tried and punished. The difference here is the police are never subject to the same justice.

And why are police never punished, because police unions. Unions in their modern form are granted special privileges by the government and use those privileges to extort society. There is nothing wrong with people joining groups, collective bargaining, etc -- the problem is that they are given special privileges by the state.

If any group is being given special privileges by the state, it's the police...

Normally, a union is formed to balance the power of capitalists with the laborers they employ. In the case of law enforcement, there is no capital, nor is their labor being used to produce something of value. If anything, law enforcement defends the interests of capitalists, rather than being subject to abuse by capitalists.

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#405

Post by yibg »

jackvalentine wrote: post #399
yibg wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe a lot of people just have had negative interactions with unions.

Entirely possible, but also maybe people who have positive experiences with unions can't be bothered talking about them when the popular narrative of 'unions are bad' means they're inevitably going to have to defend them and explain every bad thing that has ever happened at or adjacent to a union. I'm a union member, but man do I think twice about ever commenting on anything to do with a union because of the huge neg…

I for one would like to hear more about the positive experience. The narrative in the US tend to be polarized, and I do wish we can have a civil discussion on the merits and perspectives from both ends.

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#406

Post by tomglynch »

Frondo wrote: post #391
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt it’s a conspiracy or organized comment ring. The popular narrative around unions is one of the employees versus their employer, but ultimately even the business’ customers or adjacent businesses end up paying some of the price. For an example that will probably hit home for many HN users, try asking your trade show team about dealing with unions. The restrictions imposed by unions on trade show attendees are…

What's amazing to me about that anecdote is that it seems like such a tremendously small reason to dislike unions, for all they do to improve worker safety, pay, and provide a stop against exploitation by corporate owners. I would consider not being able to plug in my own gear at a trade show a small price to pay to show my support for unions and union workplaces.

Yeah the example they use is literally the union providing worker safety.

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#407

Post by iso1210 »

dantheman wrote: post #323
celticninja wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they offenders were arrested, tried and punished. The difference here is the police are never subject to the same justice.

And why are police never punished, because police unions. Unions in their modern form are granted special privileges by the government and use those privileges to extort society. There is nothing wrong with people joining groups, collective bargaining, etc -- the problem is that they are given special privileges by the state.

No police union in the UK

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#408

Post by em-bee »

yibg wrote: post #290
em-bee wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

were you aware of amazons practices before you started to work there? if yes, how did that factor into your decision to take the job?

Do you mean specifically around their anti union stance? It wasn’t widely in the news back then. But I also don’t want to be part of an union and most of the unions I’m aware of in North America are not shining examples. So I’d be ok with working there today given what I know.

i wasn't looking specifically at that, but anything they are doing to take advantage of employees, third-party sellers or customers, etc.

that said, i really just wanted to elaborate on the question itself, without expecting a detailed response because i don't think it's fair to single out individual employees for working at a company with issues. even if you can change jobs easily, other companies are not necessarily better, and they may have other problems.

with that in mind i appreciate your response even more.

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#409

Post by iso1210 »

stale2002 wrote: post #206
pydry wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They dropped a concrete block on his car. It wasn't attempted murder it was attempted property damage. So, yes, they killed him and were rightly imprisoned for manslaughter.

Nah. I think I am pretty ok will calling someone who does this a murderer. That is totally fine in my book to call them that.

The distinction in England+Wales law caused a fair bit of debate in the UK at the time and was tackled in the following case

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Hancock

Re: Amazon deletes job listings for analysts to track ‘labor organizing threats’

#410

Post by iso1210 »

PeterisP wrote: post #356
kergonath wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Murder requires intent...

Well, they did intend to drop the concrete block on his car, the block wasn't dropped by accident or through their gross negligence (in which case it would be manslaughter). Murder does require intent, but it does not necessarily require an intent to kill that person ; if you intend to "just" assault a person but they die, that's murder; if you intend to kill someone but kill someone else whom you did not intend to k…

> Well, they did intend to drop the concrete block on his car, the block wasn't dropped by accident or through their gross negligence (in which case it would be manslaughter).

It was manslaughter though

Post reply on HN