5 ms·

People keep saying this will happen, but I don't understand how they can overcome the 2 big obstacles: * amazon is huge, can you really mobalise 50% of the US

People keep saying this will happen, but I don't understand how they can overcome the 2 big obstacles: * amazon is huge, can you really mobalise 50% of the US workforce to vote for it? * what happens when all the unskilled workers are simply sacked and replaced with non-union workers?

thegrim33 6y ago
Well they've already solved the second problem - a certain political ideology has decided that they're fine with turning to violence and intimidation to get their way. If Amazon starts sacking workers trying to unionize they'll just burn down more buildings, cause millions more dollars in damage to major US cities, riot for a few more months, block traffic for months, fight with any law enforcement that tries to stop them, and essentially bully/coerce/intimidate the population and local governments into enacting laws and ordinances to give them what they want. (They then call themselves the good guys and use the media their political ideology has near complete control over to paint their actions in a good light).
- tehwebguy 6y ago
  You think the protests this summer were about unionizing? Is there a news source that tricked you or did you just, like, guess?
- weare138 6y ago
  Thank you for that rambling nonsensical politically charged diatribe that has nothing to do with the topic. Your valued input has been noted.
fallingfrog 6y ago
More difficult things have been accomplished in the past. There is a strategy to a union drive, you start with little things like getting everyone to wear a red pin to work on the same day. You talk to every individual worker, one on one. It’s hard work, and management never plays fair- but it can be done. If they sack the unskilled workers the skilled ones will strike. That’s the whole idea- everyone negotiates together as a unit.
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  You know amazon has over a million employees. Talking to them one and a time and all wearing a red pin seems like a HUGE task. Also, only a tiny minority of employees are skilled. They're well paid and looked after. They have large stock options (I think the only pay over 100k at amazon is given in the form of stock). I highly doubt they'll strike for the rest. They've never met them. They don't have anything in common with them. They much closer to management. Don't get me wrong, they have every right to try. I just don't think anything even a tenth this size has been accomplished in the history of labour relations...
  - freeone3000 6y ago
    They're only closer to management in the sense that they make more money and have better conditions. Their livelihood is just as precarious and just as dependent on their bosses for income, and they can be fired just as easily -- and they have their own grievances about scope and purpose of work.
    - LatteLazy 6y ago
      That's not actually true. If you're a skilled worker, you're livelihood (and security) comes from your skills. This is the core issue with unions for skilled people. If you work hard and move around, you can make great money and be secure without a union. So why unionise? That's why there is no union of doctors or investment bankers... Imagine you're a dev at amazon, and you get 100k basic and share options worth another 100k. If you throw in with the union, you risk your job. And if you win, they get 2usd an hour more. And your 100k of share options is worthless. How does that sound like a good deal?
      - freeone3000 6y ago
        Professional organizations take their place for regulated professions - so the AMA for doctors and the NIBA for Investment Bankers. But programming isn't a regulated profession. It doesn't have a professional organization. Your "cred" is reputational and based on work history, not on actual credentials or licensure. It's closer in this sense to a trade, like electrical work or plumbing, where members frequently are unionized. Why unionize? Because your facial recognition tech is being used to round up Uigurs, or bomb Yemeni weddings, or bake cakes for gay people. To have actual say over the products you work on, and how they're used.
unitedwestand 6y ago
Sacking workers for unionizing or engaging in concerted action to address grievances is illegal. Companies (including Amazon [1]) break this law all the time, because it reduces the union's momentum and they only have to pay back pay and rehire the person if they are found to have done so. (They usually come up with threadbare pretexts and draw things out at the NLRB.) Still, this intimidation strategy works best when there are only a few workers involved. With critical mass, it becomes much harder. Additionally, the new administration will hopefully make this standard union-busting much more expensive by passing a bill to institute treble damages for unfair labor practice violations. [1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/30/amazon-fires-staten-island-coronavirus-strike-leader-chris-smalls.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/30/amazon-fires-staten-island-c...
unitedwestand 6y ago
One advantage of the current fragmented bargaining landscape is that you don't need to organize the whole company at once. You can just focus on individual workplaces ("bargaining units.") The disadvantage of this is that unionization is a slog of attrition, and you're unlikely to get a result like the Flint Sitdown Strike
therockspush 6y ago
Amazon is the most visible example of wealth transfer during this pandemic, with online shopping and AWS, so it's an obvious target for mob energy. But the idea of unionizing is quaint for a company that has become so many things (manufacturing, logistics, infrastructure, marketplace). They suggest that somehow the new administration will be friendlier to unionizing, as if that was the blocker. It doesn't take a PR genius to see what the Amazon narrative will be when people can't get their boxes of shit because of a strike. And thats just from warehouses. Extend that to AWS and Whole Foods and it'll be hard to maintain any sympathy. Amazon was already getting their tentacles on everything before covid, and now its just amplified. I'd love to see this be the motivator that encourages people to rise up against their overlords, but it's going to end up like the people that protest by blocking freeways. It just pisses off the people trying to go about their lives, and works against the cause.

thegrim33 6y ago

Well they've already solved the second problem - a certain political ideology has decided that they're fine with turning to violence and intimidation to get their way. If Amazon starts sacking workers trying to unionize they'll just burn down more buildings, cause millions more dollars in damage to major US cities, riot for a few more months, block traffic for months, fight with any law enforcement that tries to stop them, and essentially bully/coerce/intimidate the population and local governments into enacting laws and ordinances to give them what they want. (They then call themselves the good guys and use the media their political ideology has near complete control over to paint their actions in a good light).

tehwebguy 6y ago
You think the protests this summer were about unionizing? Is there a news source that tricked you or did you just, like, guess?
weare138 6y ago
Thank you for that rambling nonsensical politically charged diatribe that has nothing to do with the topic. Your valued input has been noted.

fallingfrog 6y ago

More difficult things have been accomplished in the past. There is a strategy to a union drive, you start with little things like getting everyone to wear a red pin to work on the same day. You talk to every individual worker, one on one. It’s hard work, and management never plays fair- but it can be done. If they sack the unskilled workers the skilled ones will strike. That’s the whole idea- everyone negotiates together as a unit.

LatteLazy 6y ago
You know amazon has over a million employees. Talking to them one and a time and all wearing a red pin seems like a HUGE task. Also, only a tiny minority of employees are skilled. They're well paid and looked after. They have large stock options (I think the only pay over 100k at amazon is given in the form of stock). I highly doubt they'll strike for the rest. They've never met them. They don't have anything in common with them. They much closer to management. Don't get me wrong, they have every right to try. I just don't think anything even a tenth this size has been accomplished in the history of labour relations...
- freeone3000 6y ago
  They're only closer to management in the sense that they make more money and have better conditions. Their livelihood is just as precarious and just as dependent on their bosses for income, and they can be fired just as easily -- and they have their own grievances about scope and purpose of work.
  - LatteLazy 6y ago
    That's not actually true. If you're a skilled worker, you're livelihood (and security) comes from your skills. This is the core issue with unions for skilled people. If you work hard and move around, you can make great money and be secure without a union. So why unionise? That's why there is no union of doctors or investment bankers... Imagine you're a dev at amazon, and you get 100k basic and share options worth another 100k. If you throw in with the union, you risk your job. And if you win, they get 2usd an hour more. And your 100k of share options is worthless. How does that sound like a good deal?
    - freeone3000 6y ago
      Professional organizations take their place for regulated professions - so the AMA for doctors and the NIBA for Investment Bankers. But programming isn't a regulated profession. It doesn't have a professional organization. Your "cred" is reputational and based on work history, not on actual credentials or licensure. It's closer in this sense to a trade, like electrical work or plumbing, where members frequently are unionized. Why unionize? Because your facial recognition tech is being used to round up Uigurs, or bomb Yemeni weddings, or bake cakes for gay people. To have actual say over the products you work on, and how they're used.

unitedwestand 6y ago

Sacking workers for unionizing or engaging in concerted action to address grievances is illegal. Companies (including Amazon [1]) break this law all the time, because it reduces the union's momentum and they only have to pay back pay and rehire the person if they are found to have done so. (They usually come up with threadbare pretexts and draw things out at the NLRB.) Still, this intimidation strategy works best when there are only a few workers involved. With critical mass, it becomes much harder. Additionally, the new administration will hopefully make this standard union-busting much more expensive by passing a bill to institute treble damages for unfair labor practice violations. [1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/30/amazon-fires-staten-island-coronavirus-strike-leader-chris-smalls.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/30/amazon-fires-staten-island-c...

unitedwestand 6y ago

One advantage of the current fragmented bargaining landscape is that you don't need to organize the whole company at once. You can just focus on individual workplaces ("bargaining units.") The disadvantage of this is that unionization is a slog of attrition, and you're unlikely to get a result like the Flint Sitdown Strike

therockspush 6y ago

Amazon is the most visible example of wealth transfer during this pandemic, with online shopping and AWS, so it's an obvious target for mob energy. But the idea of unionizing is quaint for a company that has become so many things (manufacturing, logistics, infrastructure, marketplace). They suggest that somehow the new administration will be friendlier to unionizing, as if that was the blocker. It doesn't take a PR genius to see what the Amazon narrative will be when people can't get their boxes of shit because of a strike. And thats just from warehouses. Extend that to AWS and Whole Foods and it'll be hard to maintain any sympathy. Amazon was already getting their tentacles on everything before covid, and now its just amplified. I'd love to see this be the motivator that encourages people to rise up against their overlords, but it's going to end up like the people that protest by blocking freeways. It just pisses off the people trying to go about their lives, and works against the cause.