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

Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 632 posts

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#71

Post by onion2k »

Zealotux wrote: post #10

From a non-US point of view, this whole anti-union strategy from Amazon is somehow hilarious to witness on top of being sad. This kind of propaganda feels like its coming from another age, or dimension.

I'm going to assume you're not in the UK, because this is straight out of UK government's playbook during the 70s and 80s when they were union busting the mining and engineering unions. The page on Wikipedia about the union leader Derek Robinson is an eye-opener ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Robinson_(trade_unionist... ) ... pay close attention to the work of MI5 in bringing his union activity to an end.

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#72

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #55
ahelwer wrote: post #7

This Amazon union vote is one of the few things I see around me in the world where things have a chance of heading in the right direction. Truly hoping it succeeds and creates a nucleation event to stop our march into ever-more-innovative methods of worker exploitation.

I felt this was about Uber being told they had to treat drivers like employees in California too, and look how that turned out: A dystopian rule that lawmakers can't overturn to enable worker exploitation.

These kinds of takes are always weird to me. Shouldn't it matter, at least a little, that the rule was what a 17-point majority of voters wanted? You don't have to personally agree with every democratic outcome, but it almost sounds like you're saying the results of a vote aren't legitimate if they go the wrong way.

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#73

Post by skeeter2020 »

lucasmullens wrote: post #30

How does this not backfire? At Google I'm just sitting on the sidelines with the whole union thing, but if they sent me something like this I'd join and support the union immediately.

That doesn't make any sense. You're saying you have made some sort of value judgement, presumably based on logic and information, but if someone sends you a piece of propaganda you'd totally change your position? You don' t play poker, do you?

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#74

Post by [deleted] »

staticman2 wrote: post #50
duxup wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I understand what you're saying.

Imagine we lived in a world with moral consequences, perhaps the sort of world where evil people burn in hell or something like the twilight zone, where supernatural events strike down bad people, rather than the real world. Lying to people to try to get them to vote against their economic interests seems the sort of thing that lands people in hell or haunted by an evil doll in such a universe. "He's just making his…

[deleted]

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#75

Post by SllX »

duxup wrote: post #54
rtpg wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't your boss telling you how to do that though. The direct power imbalance is pretty different, I think.

If we argue that what is wrong about the situation is the 'balance of power'... would that mean then no employer should be able to make their case when it comes to such situation because the balance of power wouldn't be fair? That seems weird. And unions once established have their own balance of power, and that's not in favor of the individual.

That is weird.

The literal purpose of a corporation in all its varieties, for profit, non-profit, co-op, S Corp, C Corp etc. is to pool the resources of its owners and serve their interests.

Unions are just another type of corporation.

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#76

Post by ojnabieoot »

duxup wrote: post #8

Call me crazy but I think the employer should get to make their case too.

I don’t think there’s a single labor activist who disagrees with you. We aren’t saying Amazon is forbidden from making their case, but rather that their specific behavior is unacceptably intimidating and misleading. We agree Amazon is allowed to argue that unions are bad (although I think the rank condescension and borderline dishonesty in the mailer is a legitimate news story - the thing about dues is a lie, Alabama is right-to-work).

The problem as I see it are the two other things:

- telling employees to vote by March 1st in a specific mailbox, even though the deadline is March 29th, is blatant intimidation (since management is clearly surveilling the mailbox and will know if you don’t comply). If that’s not illegal it really needs to be.

- “Protect what you have” is a very suspicious and threatening message that suggests retaliation if workers unionize (especially given the last page in the mailer). I would say this is paranoid if we weren’t talking about Amazon - they lost all presumptions of decency with the traffic light shenanigan.

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#77

Post by ahelwer »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #72
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I felt this was about Uber being told they had to treat drivers like employees in California too, and look how that turned out: A dystopian rule that lawmakers can't overturn to enable worker exploitation.

These kinds of takes are always weird to me. Shouldn't it matter, at least a little, that the rule was what a 17-point majority of voters wanted? You don't have to personally agree with every democratic outcome, but it almost sounds like you're saying the results of a vote aren't legitimate if they go the wrong way.

Well, this is where we see inequality as a force that perverts democracy. The side of capital has an enormous quantity of resources (by definition) that they use to influence electoral outcomes. So in a way, yes, the votes aren't very legitimate when the side of capital out-spends the side of labor by thirteen to one: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-10-16/skelton-...

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#78

Post by maedla »

duxup wrote: post #69
mc32 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like some unions tell their members to vote for this or that party? I’m still waiting for the Teachers’ Union to endorse the Libertarian party one day soon -I’m sure it’s gonna happen.

I'm waiting for the Libertarian party to embrace drivers licenses ;)

They are too worried about the toaster licenses

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#79

Post by duxup »

SllX wrote: post #75
duxup wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we argue that what is wrong about the situation is the 'balance of power'... would that mean then no employer should be able to make their case when it comes to such situation because the balance of power wouldn't be fair? That seems weird. And unions once established have their own balance of power, and that's not in favor of the individual.

That is weird. The literal purpose of a corporation in all its varieties, for profit, non-profit, co-op, S Corp, C Corp etc. is to pool the resources of its owners and serve their interests. Unions are just another type of corporation.

>serve their interests.

Serve the interests of the majority... and even like a corporation sometimes they don't even manage to do that.

Human organizations kinda stink sometimes, although I wouldn't really endorse another kind...

Re: Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

#80

Post by rtkwe »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #67
faitswulff wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon literally employs a union busting company from the last century (edit: from two centuries ago, apparently): > The Pinkerton National Detective Agency was founded as a private police force in Chicago in 1850, and quickly expanded its reach; its detectives initially focused on catching thieves and burglars, but soon became the bane of the labor movement for their work as enthusiastic, vicious strikebreakers. Thr…

When Teen Vogue calls someone a "billionaire vampire", is that a compliment, or are vampires out again?

Billionaire vampire is out, vampire billionaire is ambiguous though I think the YA romance industry has moved on since 2010.
Post reply on HN