What's Happening After an Amazon Warehouse's Workers Voted to Form a Union (theguardian.com) 107
Former Amazon employee Christian Smalls later spearheaded their historic successful unionization drive, reports Insider. On Friday he celebrated by popping open a bottle of champagne, adding "We want to thank Jeff Bezos for going to space, because when he was up there, we was signing people up. We were out here getting signatures...."
Smalls became a vocal Amazon labor advocate over coronavirus safety measures in March 2020, and was fired the same month for what the company said was an unrelated event. In a leaked memo obtained by Vice in 2020, an Amazon lawyer told Jeff Bezos was that Smalls was "not smart, or articulate, and to the extent the press wants to focus on us versus him, we will be in a much stronger PR position...."
Smalls told Insider his group never had the resources of a traditional union, and "We started from scratch with nothing." But now the president of the powerful Teamsters union says his own group "will step up the pressure on Amazon and mount its own efforts to unionize the company..." reports the Guardian: In an interview with the Guardian Sean O'Brien said it was vital to organize Amazon, asserting that the e-commerce company has "total disrespect" for its workers and was putting downward pressure on standards for unionized warehouse workers and truck drivers across the U.S. "You have an employer like Jeff Bezos taking a joyride into space, and he bangs on his workers to be able to fund his trip," said O'Brien, who was inaugurated as Teamsters president on 22 March. He asserted that Amazon workers would benefit greatly from joining the Teamsters, saying that Amazon's drivers and warehouse workers are treated and paid considerably worse than their unionized counterparts at other companies....
Concerned that Amazon's lower pay is undercutting Teamster employers and Teamster contracts, O'Brien said he didn't want Amazon to threaten the livelihood of Teamsters or "diminish the standards established by collective bargaining agreements"....
News of the Staten Island victory comes as union activity is experiencing a resurgence in the U.S.
Meanwhile, long-time Slashdot reader theodp shares Amazon's reaction: The complete April 1st Statement from Amazon on Staten Island union vote: "We're disappointed with the outcome of the election in Staten Island because we believe having a direct relationship with the company is best for our employees.
"We're evaluating our options, including filing objections based on the inappropriate and undue influence by the National Labor Relations Board that we and others (including the National Retail Federation and U.S. Chamber of Commerce) witnessed in this election."
Both groups actually only objected to one specific lawsuit brought against Amazon by America's National Labor Relations Board seeking reinstatement of an employee fired 23 months earlier. The National Retail Federation argues that suit gave the appearance of trying to influence the election, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce similarly made the argument that the action "seems dubiously timed to sway voters."
Engadget reported last month that that employee was also "fired in the early days of the pandemic after he helped lead protests over safety concerns involving the company's COVID-19 protocols."
Smalls told Insider his group never had the resources of a traditional union, and "We started from scratch with nothing." But now the president of the powerful Teamsters union says his own group "will step up the pressure on Amazon and mount its own efforts to unionize the company..." reports the Guardian: In an interview with the Guardian Sean O'Brien said it was vital to organize Amazon, asserting that the e-commerce company has "total disrespect" for its workers and was putting downward pressure on standards for unionized warehouse workers and truck drivers across the U.S. "You have an employer like Jeff Bezos taking a joyride into space, and he bangs on his workers to be able to fund his trip," said O'Brien, who was inaugurated as Teamsters president on 22 March. He asserted that Amazon workers would benefit greatly from joining the Teamsters, saying that Amazon's drivers and warehouse workers are treated and paid considerably worse than their unionized counterparts at other companies....
Concerned that Amazon's lower pay is undercutting Teamster employers and Teamster contracts, O'Brien said he didn't want Amazon to threaten the livelihood of Teamsters or "diminish the standards established by collective bargaining agreements"....
News of the Staten Island victory comes as union activity is experiencing a resurgence in the U.S.
Meanwhile, long-time Slashdot reader theodp shares Amazon's reaction: The complete April 1st Statement from Amazon on Staten Island union vote: "We're disappointed with the outcome of the election in Staten Island because we believe having a direct relationship with the company is best for our employees.
"We're evaluating our options, including filing objections based on the inappropriate and undue influence by the National Labor Relations Board that we and others (including the National Retail Federation and U.S. Chamber of Commerce) witnessed in this election."
Both groups actually only objected to one specific lawsuit brought against Amazon by America's National Labor Relations Board seeking reinstatement of an employee fired 23 months earlier. The National Retail Federation argues that suit gave the appearance of trying to influence the election, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce similarly made the argument that the action "seems dubiously timed to sway voters."
Engadget reported last month that that employee was also "fired in the early days of the pandemic after he helped lead protests over safety concerns involving the company's COVID-19 protocols."
April Fools? (Score:2)
Jeff Bezos: "Wait, that wasn't an April Fools joke?"
Unions shouldn't be funny (Score:4, Interesting)
Rather feeble FP attempt. Shall we hope it gets the moderation it deserves? If I ever got the mod point to give, I might give it the Funny. (And the moderation system seems to be working again. If you can call that working. (Perhaps the moderators should form a union?)) (And I have a new crazy theory about FPs and their legacies...)
Anyway, I think the interests of everyone should be considered in order to find the best equilibrium policies. In recent years the interests of workers haven't counted for shite. Combination of dividing to conquer and "right to work" disguises for selfish scabs. Such an ugly term, scab, but you might want to read about the history before you say it's too ugly. (And I used to be a Pinkerton, too. Long time ago, but I still remember Lt Rainey who bumped me to Sergeant...)
Meanwhile, the interests of the shareholders have counted way too heavily. Buying shares should be regarded as like buying lottery tickets. "Youse pays yer money and youse takes yer chances." If you don't like the company, you should sell your lottery tickets and buy better ones. To pretend the shareholders actually own anything in these fantasy stock market days is really hilarious.
As for management, they are the ones making the decisions. It is safe to assume that they will make lots of decisions that benefit themselves. At least while the managers are human. Maybe we can hope for better from our AI overlords? Soon to arrive, though Amazon already treats most employees like disposable robots. Which is what this entire union thing is supposed to be about.
Re: (Score:3)
It was a pretty good FP, be honest.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay, so I'll agree. Now let's see you persuade the moderators.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't need to. In terms of funny, my judgement is better than moderation.
Fully automated warehouse (Score:4, Funny)
I guess we now know which Amazon warehouse will be first to be fully automated and run by robots.
Re: (Score:2)
The Matrix showed what happens when one abuses robot concerns.
Re: Fully automated warehouse (Score:2)
No, that was Blade Runner.
The Matrix showed the perils of letting a massive, dominating parasitic entity impose itself on your relationship with reality. Sort of like a union.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You've confused parasites with symbionts.
Unionization will lead to higher wages, better working conditions, better benefits, more paid leave, and better job security.
Re: (Score:2)
... for robotics engineers and AI researchers.
Re: (Score:2)
How about that. A Luddite afraid of imaginary machines. How very sad.
Re: (Score:2)
Who said anything about being afraid? I think it's awesome. More power to them. It's undignified for a human to do a robot's job, whether in a union or not.
Re: (Score:2)
So many lies. I'd deal with just one, even though your post deserves far less attention. Union dues more than pay for themselves in increased compensation vs non-union shops. This is an indisputable FACT.
Re: (Score:2)
It's exhausting dealing the same long-debunked nonsense over and over again... ugh...
Re: (Score:2)
We're fighting against 40+ years of endless, professional produced, anti-union propaganda. I'm sorry that you find the truth boring, but when you've got whole "news" networks working to spread bullshit 24 hours a day, and an army of useful idiots repeating it on forums and social media, some repetition is going to be necessary.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Outsourcing was one of the consequences of unionization.
That's completely delusional.
Re: (Score:1)
Outsourcing was one of the consequences of unionization.
That's completely delusional.
No, it's not delusional, it's simple economy. Unionization raised the costs of labour above the market values and companies have gone after the cheaper labour. If Nike Air Jordans were sewn by the unionized workers paid $15/hr, they would cost $300 per pair or more, instead of $100/pair. So what did Nike do? And it's not just Nike, it is also New Balance, Levy Strauss, Fruit of the Loom, Hanes, Wrangler and many other garment manufacturers. And car manufacturers as well. Why do you think did Ford move their
Re: (Score:2)
Again, you're clearly delusional. We don't need to speculate, we know what happens. It's not your bizarre right-wing fever dream.
Re: (Score:1)
Again, you're clearly delusional. We don't need to speculate, we know what happens. It's not your bizarre right-wing fever dream.
Who are "we"? In addition to "regal plural", ad hominem attack with the claim that I'm "delusional" is not an argument. Can you provide a coherent and logical argument or do you consider logic being racist? We, Loki Prankster, approve of this message.
Re: (Score:2)
You first.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I already have provided an argument.
If you call that an argument, I'm wasting my time.
Re: (Score:1)
I already have provided an argument.
If you call that an argument, I'm wasting my time.
Whatever it is, you don't seem able to provide a coherent answer, only ad hominem attacks. That is a communist tactics, comrade.
Re: (Score:1)
Unionization will lead to higher wages, better working conditions, better benefits, more paid leave, and better job security.
Wow! You bought into the whole "Union is Best" propaganda, didn't you? Or was it Kool-Aid?
Let's see, Unions: an extra layer of management with little productivity, lower wages due to dues, artificial seniority-based promotions forced on the company, strikes imminent anytime someone's ego gets bruised, everyone running to the shop steward for permissions, limited training opportunities outside your stovepipe responsibilities, and wasted time because "that work belongs to a different union" so you can't change a light bulb.
I've worked in Union shops before and never again.
There will be some technical progress out of it:
: https://www.theregister.com/20... [theregister.com]
Few more robots and the unions will not matter at all.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
And, of course, to higher prices for the consumers.
More nonsense! Prices are already as high as the market will bear. That's how markets work. If they could raise prices, they would have already.
Besides, we know that the single best way to stimulate an economy is from the bottom. Higher wages helps more than just the worker receiving them, but also boosts their local economy. That's what actually creates jobs, not adding more money to some billionaire assholes hoard.
Re: (Score:1)
And, of course, to higher prices for the consumers.
More nonsense! Prices are already as high as the market will bear. That's how markets work. If they could raise prices, they would have already.
Besides, we know that the single best way to stimulate an economy is from the bottom. Higher wages helps more than just the worker receiving them, but also boosts their local economy. That's what actually creates jobs, not adding more money to some billionaire assholes hoard.
So who will pay the higher costs of labour, caused by unionization? The shareholders? I don't think so. They will simply sell their stock and invest into something more profitable. Shareholders are the last people that the company wants to hurt, because they can drive the value of the company down and fire the management. The money for the union must come from somewhere. It's either customers or shareholders. In both cases, it doesn't bode well for the company. If I were Jeff Bezos, I would simply shut dow
Re: (Score:2)
I don't even know where to begin. You're completely delusional.
Wages have increased rather dramatically in various sectors thanks to the "big quit". Did any of your bullshit doomsday predictions come true? No, they did not.
Re: (Score:2)
Besides, we know that the single best way to stimulate an economy is from the bottom. Higher wages helps more than just the worker receiving them, but also boosts their local economy. That's what actually creates jobs, not adding more money to some billionaire assholes hoard.
I always liked this little truism...
"The money was all appropriated for the top in the hopes that it would trickle down to the needy. Mr. Hoover didn’t know that money trickled up. Give it to the people at the bottom and the people at the top will have it before night, anyhow. But it will at least have passed through the poor fellow’s hands.”
-Will Rogers in the St. Petersburg Times - Nov 26, 1932
Re: (Score:1)
No, that was Blade Runner.
The Matrix showed the perils of letting a massive, dominating parasitic entity impose itself on your relationship with reality. Sort of like a union.
Sort of like a Board of Directors.
There, fixed it for you
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and let me know when they get the Amazon Scout [zdnet.com] up and running there. I hear they come from the factory with an empty soda bottle built-in.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah the peons should accept their overlords beneficence.
If automation is coming then it's coming with or without unions. This way the workers get a safer, better paid environment in the mean time.
Re: (Score:2)
Self-destruction. (Score:3)
Amazon knows that if they become fully automated that it will be the end of their virtual monopoly. If all it takes is warehouses, some robots, and a webpage then they will have a new competitor overnight.
Re: (Score:2)
It takes ALL the robots, ALL the warehouses, and all the inventory to compete with an Amazon... that is a pretty high wall. Employees are the easy part.
The death knell for Amazon will be someone offering better products and not the shitty knockoffs that keep coming.
Re: (Score:2)
It takes ALL the robots, ALL the warehouses, and all the inventory to compete with an Amazon... that is a pretty high wall.
You just need a few warehouses run by robots and better rates for sellers to start with. This will allow you to dominate a single city and then expand.
The death knell for Amazon will be someone offering better products and not the shitty knockoffs that keep coming.
Not really. So long as price is king, people will buy knockoffs.
Re: (Score:1)
As one new owner of an online company said. "Where do you buy your products that you sell?" or another one "how do you get customer". What that means is that it might sound easy, you just buy stuff and sell it. But where do you buy it? These are trade secrets, there are contracts etc. To get customers you must have a large variety of products with cheap prices. Competing with Amazon is like competing with Google. Pretty much impossible, unless you have something that makes you a lot better.
Re: (Score:2)
As one new owner of an online company said. "Where do you buy your products that you sell?"
From manufacturers.
or another one "how do you get customer".
Advertising.
This is retail 101.
It will work like in Germany (Score:2)
A Union in one state decides to strike in all warehouses.
The Logistics AI delivers all parcels from warehouses in a different state or even country.
Nobody notices the strike.
Logisticking around stuff like that is their business.
Re: (Score:2)
A Union in one state decides to strike in all warehouses.
There are like 3 errors in this one sentence. You don't seem to know how unions in Germany work.
Amazon prices (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Well, he didn't mean he would tip them, duh.
He meant that YOU should tip them.
Re: (Score:1)
You can. Go to the warehouse gates and give money to the people walking in/out.
That is impractical. I'd rather be able to do it with a few clicks, like I do when I order food.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd rather Amazon pay their employees a fair wage, appropriate benefits, and provide decent working conditions.
Besides, you know Amazon would find a way to skim from a tip system while at the same time using it as an excuse to drive down wages.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd rather Amazon pay their employees a fair wage, appropriate benefits, and provide decent working conditions.
That would be better, yes. We'll see how the union thing works out. I'm hopeful but not optimistic.
Re: (Score:1)
I'd rather Amazon pay their employees a fair wage, appropriate benefits, and provide decent working conditions.
Besides, you know Amazon would find a way to skim from a tip system while at the same time using it as an excuse to drive down wages.
There is no such thing as "fair wage", There is market wage: how much are employers willing to pay for your work. If there is an employer willing to pay for your work more than Amazon, then by all means, change your job. That's what market is for. It's a responsibility of every individual to maintain valuable market skills. Jobs requiring only brawn and no brain tend to be paid less than the jobs requiring some brain. Union is a racket, something like "nice warehouse you have here, it would be a shame if p
Re: (Score:2)
Do you find your chains that comforting? Libertarians are impossible to reason with because you guys literally think slavery is freedom, but I'll try anyway.
I suppose you want to go back to the days of company towns, where corporations pay workers in script that they can only spend at the company store, so they can't save up and leave. Not that they paid enough to live on anyway. Company stores also extended credit to keep workers indebted to the company.
Do you really think this was okay because that was
Re: (Score:2)
I'm an Amazon customer and Prime member also. I'd gladly tip the people doing their shitty jobs on my behalf if I could.
In general, tipping should just go away. Pay the workers a living wage, and get rid of that insane custom. The real price of the service should be included in the bill.
Comparing worker conditions in Europe (Norway in particular) and the US, I think that getting a union is a good step forward.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You missed this part.
News of the Staten Island victory comes as union activity is experiencing a resurgence in the U.S.
Something to think about before putting your wants before everyone else's needs.
Re: (Score:1)
You missed this part.
News of the Staten Island victory comes as union activity is experiencing a resurgence in the U.S.
Something to think about before putting your wants before everyone else's needs.
OK, let me tell you how it works in the real world. A union increases cost of labor at a given industry, and by doing so, causes the costs of *products* of that industry to also go up in price (whaa...? You thought that teary-eyed CEOs are going to pull that money out of their pockets? Sorry to disappoint.) What happens next is that as more and more industries unionize the prices of everything go up (because the country unionizing does not increase productivity of that country, on the contrary, it decreases
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Amazon prices (Score:5, Interesting)
Let me tell you how the real world actually works:
Productivity has been on an unstoppable upward trajectory since the 1950's, yet wages haven't even kept pace with inflation! The wealth gap continues to widen with no signs of slowing down.
Those things you're afraid of happening when unions return? It's been happening without them for years. Not because of unions, but because of corporate greed. Unions are our best hope to fight back against that.
The "inflation" we're seeing now? Unions had nothing to do with that. That was 100% caused by corporate greed. First, by causing the supply chain problems the later by good old-fashioned price gouging. Oil is under $100/barrel right now. Why haven't gas prices dropped? The answer is obvious. Stop licking that boot and look up.
Unions put real power into the hands of workers. It protects their jobs and brings them better wages, benefits, and working conditions.
Strong unions are a win for everyone except a few fat cats at the very top. Do you think they'll toss a few coins at your feet if you carry water for them? Get real. Unions are clearly the way forward. Why do you think Amazon is fighting so hard against them? They don't want to give up any of their power and control. They like being able to crush anyone who dares ask for basic things like workplace safety. That won't happen when the people have a union behind them!
Re: (Score:1)
What you're missing is the desire to be the fat cat at the top. Talking about the everyone else is essentially irrelevant to the surprisingly large number of utterly deluded people who believe that with enough hard work they can be three next Jeff Bezos. And of course a big part of that is not accepting wealth of 50 billion when you can screw over your employees as hard as possible to make it 51 billion.
That's the dream and you can't reason someone out of their dreams.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Let me tell you how the real world actually works:
Productivity has been on an unstoppable upward trajectory since the 1950's, yet wages haven't even kept pace with inflation! The wealth gap continues to widen with no signs of slowing down.
Those things you're afraid of happening when unions return? It's been happening without them for years. Not because of unions, but because of corporate greed. Unions are our best hope to fight back against that.
The "inflation" we're seeing now? Unions had nothing to do with that. That was 100% caused by corporate greed. First, by causing the supply chain problems the later by good old-fashioned price gouging. Oil is under $100/barrel right now. Why haven't gas prices dropped? The answer is obvious. Stop licking that boot and look up.
Unions put real power into the hands of workers. It protects their jobs and brings them better wages, benefits, and working conditions.
Strong unions are a win for everyone except a few fat cats at the very top. Do you think they'll toss a few coins at your feet if you carry water for them? Get real. Unions are clearly the way forward. Why do you think Amazon is fighting so hard against them? They don't want to give up any of their power and control. They like being able to crush anyone who dares ask for basic things like workplace safety. That won't happen when the people have a union behind them!
LOL. Unions will make oil and gas cheaper. I don't even know how to debate this level of stupidity.
Re: (Score:2)
That's because you don't know how to read. They didn't say that unions would bring gas prices down, they said that corporate greed is what drove gas prices up. Oil has been more expensive in the past with lower gas prices. It's neither supply nor labour costs that have driven prices up, so why are you being gouged at the pump?
I agree that you have no idea how to debate this, but it's because you don't understand the conversation that's being had.
Re: (Score:2)
This is the reason that I continue to read the comments on /.
Thank you.
Re: (Score:3)
I forgot to mention the customers in my earlier comment on the story.
On the one hand, I think your position is reasonable, rather akin to what I said about the shareholders. But what happens when you can't find another company to shop at? (The book market is a good example because the publishers only profit from bestsellers and now there is no bestselling book without Amazon.)
On the other hand, I think you're being too simpleminded in reducing complicated things to the single dimension of price. Do you real
Re: (Score:2)
That was when I made my second and final purchase from Amazon.
Boy, you sure showed them.
Re: (Score:2)
NAK
Re: (Score:2)
Walmart is not great at getting products to homes. I have tried to order from them a few times, and it has never been a great experience. The last order was a $10 thing that was a week through fedex.
Amazon succeeds because it is a zero friction transact
Re: (Score:2)
As an Amazon customer and a Prime member, I am mostly interested in the prices.
I try to buy most things locally, but Amazon is really good for things I can't find, or are really difficult to find, locally. I don't really want to drive to / buy from 10 different local stores, or buy from 10 different online stores for, (usually) less common, things. I'm not concerned with saving the most nickles and dimes on items as my time is more valuable. Just my $0.02,
Re: (Score:2)
The increased costs of a union warehouse amount to a rounding error on their bottom line. My heart weeps.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Your indifference to human suffering is appalling but not surprising. It seems there is a significant contingent of humans that lack one of the components needed to empathize with the plight of others.
Re:No winners here (Score:5, Informative)
On the one hand Amazon is deplorable. On the other, giving people power that shouldn't or can't handle it, never ends well.
The whole thing is a crapfest.
I'm having a hard time figuring out what you're trying to say here. When you mention the people who "shouldn't or can't handle" power, are you talking about the newly-unionized Amazon workers, or Christian Smalls, or the Teamsters?
Personally, I'd put Bezos and the entire upper echelon at 'Zon in the category of people who shouldn't or can't handle power. They're among those destroying both the middle class and the climate in the name of extending that power and accumulating obscene levels of wealth.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the reality is "all of the above".
CEOs and leaders quite often put profits of the company above people's wellbeing.
Powerful unions quite often put profits of the people above a company's wellbeing.
Both can be abused to the point of self destruction. If you fuck your workforce hard enough you will go bust. If you fuck your employer hard enough you will go bust.
Seen it first hand where a company screwed its employees until everyone quit and then went under
Seen it first hand where a union negotiated in
In other words ... (Score:2)
He [Teamster President Sean O'Brien] asserted that Amazon workers would benefit greatly from joining the Teamsters, saying that Amazon's drivers and warehouse workers are treated and paid considerably worse than their unionized counterparts at other companies....
Concerned that Amazon's lower pay is undercutting Teamster employers and Teamster contracts, O'Brien said he didn't want Amazon to threaten the livelihood of Teamsters or "diminish the standards established by collective bargaining agreements"....
Amazon workers joining the Teamsters would benefit the Teamsters.
Re: (Score:2)
If it increases their pay, then it will benefit Amazon workers, too.
Amazon Leadership on 2020, 2022 Election Results (Score:3)
A cynic might point out that top Amazon management hasn't always been hesitant about accepting the outcome of a democratic election:
Jeff Bezos, Nov 8, 2020 [businessinsider.com]: "Unity, empathy, and decency are not characteristics of a bygone era. Congratulations President-elect @JoeBiden and Vice President-elect @KamalaHarris. By voting in record numbers, the American people proved again that our democracy is strong." (the Electoral College certified Biden's victory [slashdot.org] more than a month later)
Amazon, Apr 1, 2022 [aboutamazon.com]: "We're disappointed with the outcome of the election in Staten Island because we believe having a direct relationship with the company is best for our employees. We're evaluating our options, including filing objections based on the inappropriate and undue influence by the NLRB that we and others (including the National Retail Federation and U.S. Chamber of Commerce) witnessed in this election."
Good or bad?` (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no "unions are always good" or "unions are always bad."
Sometimes unions are good: they increase pay, they make hiring more fair, they reduce injuries at work.
Sometimes unions are bad: they take union dues, they are yet another power structure that employees have to deal with, they reduce work enjoyment when bad employees can't be fired.
In this case, will the union be good or bad? Time will tell.
Re: (Score:3)
Considering the type of work and the reported conditions, it seems pretty obvious that this will be an improvement for Amazon workers.
Re: (Score:2)
I will agree that there is obvious potential for improving Amazon worker conditions.
Will that happen? I hope so. It depends on the quality and interests of the union leaders.
Re: (Score:2)
If I had to bet, I wouldn't bet on Amazon or the Unions to win in the long run; I'll bet on the free enterprise system itself to restore equilibrium to the new configuration, but I'm going to need someone to spot me a few points before I bet on us collectively to win.
Re:Good or bad?` (Score:5, Insightful)
Companies get unionized when they need to get unionized. Happy, well treated workers aren't interested in unions. The best situation for everyone is the company voluntarily treating its workers well. But when a company abuses its workers, forming a union so they can fight back is better than not. It isn't ideal, but don't blame the union or the workers for the situation. The company forced it on them.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, there can be good unions and bad unions. But how frequently are unions good, and how freq
Re: (Score:2)
My grandfather and most everyone else at his plant "hated" the union at GM, but from his experiences and how he was ACTUALLY affected, my point of view is:
The 'best deal' for the union workers comes from the standpoint of the 'threat of strike'. Strikes negatively affect both sides, but are inherently necessary when employers do not understand the former.
Me, I vote with my wallet. Companies that try to pay a living wage everywhere the
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I feel there is lots of potential for the union to improve conditions, based on reports from within Amazon.
However, whether it is good or bad depends on the quality of the union.
slagging the chamber of commerce??? (Score:1)
what, was the U.S. Chamber of Commerce not anti-employee enough?
Direct relationship best? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
A direct relationship is*** the best.
*** In countries where significant protections are in place to ensure some balance of power preventing what is largely considered modern day slavery.
In America you need unions almost to preserve basic human dignity. In many countries they are superfluous as we have governments representing people (I know that's a foreign concept to congress).
Warehouse workers already make the same pay (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Congratulations Amazon (Score:1)
You played yourself.
Have fun with the Teamsters.
was (Score:2)
- https://www.businessinsider.co... [businessinsider.com]
- Christian Smalls
America's online dollar store (Score:2)
Who do they think they are...? (Score:1)
Re: "we was signing people up" (Score:1)
Of course he is a classy guy. He accomplished what others wouldnâ(TM)t or couldnâ(TM)t do.
Re:"we was signing people up" (Score:5, Informative)
Classy.
Yes. Genuine, not pretentious.
Re: (Score:2)