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

Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 403 posts

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#71

Post by somehnguy »

ekianjo wrote: post #49
photochemsyn wrote: post #10

Realistically an Amazon-wide union is the only way Amazon workers are going to get decent wage increases. If the USA is going to allow manufacturers to outsource the majority of well-paid (~$30/hr avg) manufacturing jobs to Mexico and China, without having any cross-border capital flow penalities (neoliberal globalism in a nutshell), then the major employers like Amazon and Walmart are going to have to double their w…

> he only way Amazon workers are going to get decent wage increases. If everyone gets paid tomorrow 100 USD/hour, everything around you will start costing 10x more. Look at Switzerland.

1. Who is asking for $100/hr at this level?

2. Maybe CEOs and executives don’t need to pay themselves such absurd salaries, that would probably help.

What a strange comment imo. I can’t take the ‘everything will go up!’ stance seriously while higher ups are buying 10 houses and private jets. The wage gap is atrocious.

By the way, Switzerland’s GDP is 748 billion vs the United States’ 20.94 trillion. Comparing them like that is meaningless and silly.

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#72

Post by wahnfrieden »

sp332 wrote: post #62
ixwt wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I hazarded a guess, this might have not gone through their legal department first.

They've hired a bunch of outside agencies to help union-busting. My guess is that it came from one of them, and that Amazon will sue them for whatever damages are caused by this.

see also american corporate history of hiring gangsters to break strikes and beat workers, leaving some thugs to catch the blame

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#74

Post by wahnfrieden »

jstanley wrote: post #29
jimnotgym wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the UK the police are neither allowed to form a union or strike.

How can you ban people from going on strike? The entire point of a strike is that you're not working when you're supposed to be.

biden literally just did this yesterday

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#75

Post by Jhjjjjjjjj »

hiddencost wrote: post #58
nxmnxm99 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

We're comfortable that you'll have to pay sightly more for disposable plastic crap if it means we're not destroying worker's bodies. I'd argue that in the long term, having healthier & happier workers who see their interests aligned with the rest of the economy will lead Amazon workers to develop skills more in demand, commit fewer crimes, take better care of their health, and contribute to their communities Why do l…

No post body was provided.

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#76

Post by JWlrCk9PkipFTDq »

bombcar wrote: post #46
JWlrCk9PkipFTDq wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK I'll bite - why?

If I were to try to guess, it's that it forces political cooperation on people under threat of not having a job. Imagine the situation where every single company in your state is a union shop (you have to join the union and pay dues if you work) - and every single union is wildly pro-gun, supporting candidates who want everyone to carry two guns (but they'll compromise to only men and only one if pushed). So to live…

I get your point, but that's specifically compulsory union membership (which I agree is undesirable). It's a huge leap from that to "unions should be illegal".

Side note - where I am (Australia) compulsory union membership is illegal.

At its core a trade union is an organisation that represents workers interests, and that formally negotiates on behalf of its members. To say that unions should be illegal is to say that workers should be banned from collectively negotiating via formal organisations, which seems a tad extreme.

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#77

Post by Retric »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #61
Retric wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Competition limits how much they could raise prices, automation and efficiency increases are needed to compete.

Who is more efficient than Amazon/Walmart/Target/Home Depot/Staples/Costco/etc? They set the bottom price, and if they are earning 2%-4% profit margins, then their costs increases will have to end up in either prices increases or them no longer selling the product. The funny thing is that it is Amazon coming along and greatly increasing demand for labor (in conjunction with reduced supply of that type of labor) that…

That’s assuming they keep their margins the same. The thing is Amazon isn’t manufacturing anything so their “thin” margins aren’t as sensitive to increased labor costs as 2-4% suggests.

Paying 18$ for something your selling for 20$ is a 10% margin, taxes and CC processing fees are similarly inflexible. So if 2-4% of the final price is profit then they could raise their internal costs by 10% and still be profitable.

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#78

Post by collegeburner »

wahnfrieden wrote: post #15
maybeiambatman wrote: post #4

How do legislators just allow this? Isn't this cut and dry illegal?

go look up what other illegal union busting behaviors they've gotten away with. and look at democrat or republican behaviors, such as biden actively strike-busting the other day

strike busting public unions is good. we should never recognize public unions. there is no middleman to reduce profits with the government, higher wages means we pay more, there's no "evil capitalist" who will get less instead.

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#79

Post by bombcar »

JWlrCk9PkipFTDq wrote: post #76
bombcar wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I were to try to guess, it's that it forces political cooperation on people under threat of not having a job. Imagine the situation where every single company in your state is a union shop (you have to join the union and pay dues if you work) - and every single union is wildly pro-gun, supporting candidates who want everyone to carry two guns (but they'll compromise to only men and only one if pushed). So to live…

I get your point, but that's specifically compulsory union membership (which I agree is undesirable). It's a huge leap from that to "unions should be illegal". Side note - where I am (Australia) compulsory union membership is illegal. At its core a trade union is an organisation that represents workers interests, and that formally negotiates on behalf of its members. To say that unions should be illegal is to say tha…

I believe in most cases in the US you have compulsory union membership (or as matters most, compulsory union dues).

Re: Amazon instructs New York workers “don't sign” union cards

#80

Post by ahelwer »

capableweb wrote: post #19

mrits: "You guys love the police union too, right? Right???" The general idea, yeah. It proves how strong a union can be. The implementation? No. A union for people who have monopoly on violence? No. A union that protects people who are actively hurting civilians without recourse? No.

The general framework for understanding police unions from a labor perspective is that the primary function of police is to safeguard private property rights, specifically the rights of the owning class. In that sense they are structurally opposed to all other sorts of labor unions, since labor unions threaten the maximal control of owners over the private property used (in conjunction with labor) to generate profit. Police often play a direct role in breaking strikes and harassing organizers, sometimes to the point of physical assault or murder. Police unions are permitted to exist without suppression for this reason: they support the powerful.
Post reply on HN