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

Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 150 posts

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#91

Post by bumby »

sfteus wrote: post #51
purple_ferret wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union? I am a recent member of the UAW (a more white collar local), and it's been insightful. I think unions are much weaker than people perceive. Their strengths are mostly superficial. Striking is something members don't want to resort to. Other than that all you can really do is rally and file NLRB complaints. The NLRB is a slow moving bureaucracy that any competent employer c…

From a union supporter who's spent some time reading about anti-union sentiment here, I've found it generally boils down to a few things: 1) A large portion of users on this site are entrepreneurs or in higher-level tech. For the former, unions can be seen as getting in the way of the startup lifecycle; for the latter, many believe that the value they provide makes them untouchable, or believe that the supply of high…

>Police unions

Public unions seem to be a special case and, while I generally support unions, I can understand the perspective that public unions bring about specific problems.

E.g., a strong bargaining chip for a union is the right to strike. The idea that a public service can strike creates problems. As another example, I witnessed changes in competition and economics force auto unions to compromise for the business to remain solvent; in the public sphere there is not the same competitive pressure.

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#92

Post by MisterBastahrd »

sfteus wrote: post #51
purple_ferret wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union? I am a recent member of the UAW (a more white collar local), and it's been insightful. I think unions are much weaker than people perceive. Their strengths are mostly superficial. Striking is something members don't want to resort to. Other than that all you can really do is rally and file NLRB complaints. The NLRB is a slow moving bureaucracy that any competent employer c…

From a union supporter who's spent some time reading about anti-union sentiment here, I've found it generally boils down to a few things: 1) A large portion of users on this site are entrepreneurs or in higher-level tech. For the former, unions can be seen as getting in the way of the startup lifecycle; for the latter, many believe that the value they provide makes them untouchable, or believe that the supply of high…

There are a lot of people here who see themselves as temporarily disenfranchised members of the ownership class, and so unions are a negative thing for them because some day they'll hit it big and be rewarded for their steadfast adherence to greed.

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#93

Post by [deleted] »

andrepd wrote: post #88
PathOfEclipse wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is especially true of teacher's unions, who have been openly hostile towards any meaningful way of measuring teacher performance, and have made it astronomically expensive to fire any teacher no matter how bad or incompetent. The world would be a much better place if teacher's unions didn't exist.

How do you measure teacher performance? Have you looked at the actual proposals? They're atrocious, as if education needed to be any more of a rat race of chasing idiotic """performance""" metrics.

[deleted]

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#94

Post by dfxm12 »

taeric wrote: post #52
sfteus wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a union supporter who's spent some time reading about anti-union sentiment here, I've found it generally boils down to a few things: 1) A large portion of users on this site are entrepreneurs or in higher-level tech. For the former, unions can be seen as getting in the way of the startup lifecycle; for the latter, many believe that the value they provide makes them untouchable, or believe that the supply of high…

There are at least a few of us that view unions as just a smaller extra government entity, and would prefer we rather had stronger governments. To wit, I don't want folks dependent on their job. Period. And unions often do give workers better conditions, but only so long as they are workers. That said, I typically fall on the pro-union side of most debates. Often is a better alternative than where we are.

It would be great if benefits unions are known for fighting for like health care was guaranteed by the government, but there's some things that a union closer to the workers, which is focused on one thing, can better fight for than the government, like standards for safety beyond OSHA, standards for scheduling, training, discipline, etc. If I understand what you're saying right.

If you think unions are a smaller extra government entity, how do you view Apple in that same lens? Likely, the unions have the least power in this triangle (besides individual employees not covered by a union), and Apple has more power than the government in some, but not all, respects.

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#95

Post by Geezus-42 »

bumby wrote: post #91
sfteus wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From a union supporter who's spent some time reading about anti-union sentiment here, I've found it generally boils down to a few things: 1) A large portion of users on this site are entrepreneurs or in higher-level tech. For the former, unions can be seen as getting in the way of the startup lifecycle; for the latter, many believe that the value they provide makes them untouchable, or believe that the supply of high…

> Police unions Public unions seem to be a special case and, while I generally support unions, I can understand the perspective that public unions bring about specific problems. E.g., a strong bargaining chip for a union is the right to strike. The idea that a public service can strike creates problems. As another example, I witnessed changes in competition and economics force auto unions to compromise for the busine…

The main problem with the police union (in the US) is that they have been able to repeatedly stop officers who have done horrible things from being fired or even truly punished (paid leave is not punishment).

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#96

Post by teachrdan »

jcampbell1 wrote: post #65
purple_ferret wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why wouldn't you want to be part of a union? I am a recent member of the UAW (a more white collar local), and it's been insightful. I think unions are much weaker than people perceive. Their strengths are mostly superficial. Striking is something members don't want to resort to. Other than that all you can really do is rally and file NLRB complaints. The NLRB is a slow moving bureaucracy that any competent employer c…

You joined a union where more than a dozen of the leaders were recently convicted of embezzlement. The UAW is in a bit of a pickle for awhile.

Many of us on HackerNews work for businesses like Amazon, or Tesla, or Apple, or Microsoft, which have also been found to have broken the law. Anywhere there is power there is corruption. It seems to me that joining a union where some of leadership have been convicted of crimes should be no different than working for a corporation where some of the leadership has been convicted of crimes -- you make your own decision on a case by case basis.

If none of us ever associated with anyone who's broken the law, I don't know how many folks here would ever work for a company bigger than 100 people.

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#97

Post by taeric »

dfxm12 wrote: post #94
taeric wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are at least a few of us that view unions as just a smaller extra government entity, and would prefer we rather had stronger governments. To wit, I don't want folks dependent on their job. Period. And unions often do give workers better conditions, but only so long as they are workers. That said, I typically fall on the pro-union side of most debates. Often is a better alternative than where we are.

It would be great if benefits unions are known for fighting for like health care was guaranteed by the government, but there's some things that a union closer to the workers, which is focused on one thing, can better fight for than the government, like standards for safety beyond OSHA, standards for scheduling, training, discipline, etc. If I understand what you're saying right. If you think unions are a smaller extr…

I'm not clear what you mean "safety beyond OSHA." Training and such can feel better tailored to the company, I suppose?

I'm not sure what your point is on companies regarding smaller extra governments. I do think corporate power needs checks. My view is that that is best done by governments. I'm also game for training and other benefits, but I don't like them being tied to employment. Especially not a particular employment. Health care is a good example of how that goes wrong.

Unions are odd because they are setup as representative governments. Complete with elections and essentially taxation of the represented individuals in the form of dues. Note that I am explicitly not arguing against the dues, necessarily. I would instead argue that those should go to make the entire community stronger in the form of general taxes.

And again, with the current setup, I would likely fall fully on the "pro-union" side for most debates.

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#98

Post by taeric »

Geezus-42 wrote: post #95
bumby wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Police unions Public unions seem to be a special case and, while I generally support unions, I can understand the perspective that public unions bring about specific problems. E.g., a strong bargaining chip for a union is the right to strike. The idea that a public service can strike creates problems. As another example, I witnessed changes in competition and economics force auto unions to compromise for the busine…

The main problem with the police union (in the US) is that they have been able to repeatedly stop officers who have done horrible things from being fired or even truly punished (paid leave is not punishment).

Can you explain a check that prevents the same abuse from happening in other settings?

I'm always very wary of the arguments that somehow police are a special industry where unions are bad. I don't really see any logical reasoning put forth to support that. Just evidence on how things have gone. :(

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#99

Post by bumby »

Geezus-42 wrote: post #95
bumby wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Police unions Public unions seem to be a special case and, while I generally support unions, I can understand the perspective that public unions bring about specific problems. E.g., a strong bargaining chip for a union is the right to strike. The idea that a public service can strike creates problems. As another example, I witnessed changes in competition and economics force auto unions to compromise for the busine…

The main problem with the police union (in the US) is that they have been able to repeatedly stop officers who have done horrible things from being fired or even truly punished (paid leave is not punishment).

This is the same argument about unions protecting bad employees or low performers. It seems to be an underlying problem of organizational power and not a distinction between public/private unions.

The issues I was pointing out are somewhat different. For example, there are unique problems if a police force tries to strike. In the private sector, there is the opportunity for other organizations to fill that void due to competition within the market. There is no such mechanism for most public services, public unions may have disproportionate power.

Re: Apple’s anti-union tactics in Atlanta were illegal, US officials say

#100

Post by bumby »

taeric wrote: post #98
Geezus-42 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main problem with the police union (in the US) is that they have been able to repeatedly stop officers who have done horrible things from being fired or even truly punished (paid leave is not punishment).

Can you explain a check that prevents the same abuse from happening in other settings? I'm always very wary of the arguments that somehow police are a special industry where unions are bad. I don't really see any logical reasoning put forth to support that. Just evidence on how things have gone. :(

>are a special industry

Public services are a special industry (not unique to just police) so the dynamics of unions are different.

For one, many public services exist because they are critical to the functioning of society. You can tell this is fundamentally special case because the govt carves out special mechanisms to mitigate the risk (see the the current threat of a rail strike). Secondly, the government doesn't allow competition, so there is not the same solvency problem that a private union has to address. This second point exacerbates the first. A private police force can't just come in and out-compete the existing one to show that they can work better or more efficiently.

Post reply on HN