8 ms·
Apple Store employees trying to unionize
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- rospaya 15y ago> It's certainly not an optimum time for unionizing. The economy is stalling So, the employees are un-American?
- MaxGabriel 15y agoGiven the context of the paragraph, I think its more likely the author is coming from a PR standpoint. I think they probably meant: the public isn't really behind unions because they've been demonized and are shrinking, and that problem is exacerbated because the economy is stalling. "It's certainly not an optimum time for unionizing. The economy is stalling, and the percentage of private-industry, non-farm workers belonging to unions was slightly less than 7 percent in 2010 (versus 34 percent in the late 1940s), according to the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics. And, of course, unions have been demonized ever since the Reagan Administration. Still, I'm a big believer in the rights of workers to attempt to form unions, so good luck to the folks behind the ARWU. They're going to need it."
- brown9-2 15y agoIt's a very odd point for the author to be making in the first place - the Apple Store employees would have been better off attempting to unionize 30 years ago?
- ericd 15y agoApple would probably have faced more PR backlash from the public if they had attempted to quash a union then. It's a reasonable point to say that unionizing now is more difficult.
- zachrose 15y agoYes, if by 'stalling' the article is referring to Apple's 400% growth since the bubble collapse.
- iamdave 15y agoAngry members of generation Y acting like angry members of generation Y?
- omouse 15y agoWhat does that even mean? Are you trying to say they're acting as if they're privileged?
- Brett_Anderson 15y agoSpeaking as a "convert"... Apple deserves a union.
- te_chris 15y agoGood on them. I think the demonising of unions has been one of the stupidest things to come out of the neo-liberal era. EDIT: Knew I'd get downvoted. Seriously though, why is it a bad thing for employees to bargain collectively in order to get the best deal? To me it just demonstrates the market working. i.e. people achieving "economies of scale" (to bastardise the term) in negotiations with powerful employers.
- nupark2 15y agoWhile I agree with the sentiment, unions breed enormous inefficiencies -- modern unions are worthy of scorn. I'm not convinced that there's anything a union does that a co-operative corporation couldn't do better. Instead of battering your head against Management, you can align your interests with Management. See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative
- quandrum 15y agoWhile I agree with your sentiment that cooperatives would be better, reality for many of these places are that management has no desire or will to cooperate. Sadly, in the modern world, sometimes it seem labor is a throwaway commodity, and one that can increasingly be replaced by capital.
- ericd 15y agoWhy should management give up the control of a company they founded/own/etc?
- krakensden 15y agoBecause they want to share responsibility. It's not a one way street.
- ericd 15y agoThe people who found companies tend to be the kind that are not intimidated by responsibility, though.
- byw 15y agoNot directly related to this, but I made my first ever visit to an Apple Store last Sunday. For some reason I was expecting a quiet boutique shop, but ended up wading through a sea of people. The vast majority were waiting around to fidget with demo units and kill time, while the few store employees were literally working non-stop. I'm not a crowd person, just walking around for a few minutes was stressful enough for me - I can't even imagine what it's like to actually work there all day while wearing a smile.
- texel 15y agoIt's... really stressful. I had coworkers who still have dreams about it, years later.
- mcritz 15y agoAre you talking about your experience during the Falluja campaign or working at a retail store?
- leviathant 15y agoDepends on the locale, probably. When I went to the Apple store in Philly to get an iphone4 a couple of months ago, it was quiet and the staff were too bust hanging out with each other to help me out - even after I asked to buy an iPhone. I was told someone would be right with me, and after watching the staff dawdle for 10 minutes, I interrupted a conversation and finally started the process. Nice enough people, and I understand (and appreciate) they do not use high pressure sales tactics, but it took way too long for me to buy a phone in a nearly empty store. If in 2+ years my next phone is by Apple, I'm definitely ordering online.
- wallflower 15y agoThe standard tactic employed by McDonald's is that if employees ever manage to actually get past the hurdles and get the official vote to unionize, the location of the unionized McDonald's is instantly and permanently shut down.
- Joakal 15y agoSource? This sounds like a potential exploit for other businesses.
- wallflower 15y agoI read it originally in "Fast Food Nation" by Eric Schlosser http://www.mcspotlight.org/media/press/toronto_13feb98.html http://www.mcspotlight.org/media/press/toronto_13feb98.html Starbucks employs other strategies: http://motherjones.com/politics/2009/04/are-starbucks-and-whole-foods-union-busting http://motherjones.com/politics/2009/04/are-starbucks-and-wh... Other companies do less obscene variations like instead of a layoff of unionized workers: move the factory just beyond the 2 hour commute so most entrenched employees will be forced to make their own decision.
- brudgers 15y agoI don't know about McDonalds, but Walmart has taken action consistent with this approach. http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/09/news/international/walmart_canada/ http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/09/news/international/walmart_c... http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2009/11/27/Wal-Mart-Canada-wins-union-battle/UPI-12941259348655/ http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2009/11/27/Wal-Mart-Canada-...
- daimyoyo 15y agoThis will never happen. Apple retail has one of the most selective hiring processes of any company on the planet. Would you endure 4 interviews across 6 months to sell shirts? Neither would most people but thats SOP at Apple. Yes, they probably aren't paid as well as others in their industry(especially given the $7,000/ft^2 the stores average) but it would take a lot more abuse than they put up with now before the Apple store is unionized.
- brown9-2 15y agoDo you have a source on the interviewing process for the retail store? Sounds interesting.
- daimyoyo 15y agoI just wrote up my experience in trying to get a job with the Apple store: http://1every.blogspot.com/2011/05/employment-process-at-apple-store-or.html http://1every.blogspot.com/2011/05/employment-process-at-app...
- mahyarm 15y agoStore employees go through such a process?
- scottmp10 15y agoModern unions seem to be worried more about "fair wages" (where fair is determined by the union) than preventing employee abuse. The fact of the matter is that there is choice in employment, especially if you are employable enough to be hired by Apple Retail. What is happening here is effectively the same as if Apple Retail, Best Buy, etc banded together to demand "fair wages" (as determined by them). In free markets (i.e. not what unions were initially designed for), unions provide excess leverage to employees that force companies into unfairly paying employees more than they are worth (and I feel this is a large cause of the U.S. auto market crash).
- codex 15y agoI've often wondered why, if corporations are subject to antitrust/anticollusion regulations, why unions aren't too. In both cases an entity or entities seek to gain sufficient clout such that the market no longer functions efficiently. Why should, say, the Boeing Machinist's Union or the UAE be allowed to monopolize the labor market of their respective corporations? Is it because there's a subtle difference between these instances?
- omouse 15y agoBecause unions protect the worker from being abused. The power balance is heavily in favour of management who can fire workers on a whim. Also, the market isn't efficient. If you look at any large corporation, the amount of bureaucracy is crippling sometimes (of course some unions turn into bureaucracies which also hurts).
- smokeyj 15y agoIf the large corporation is such a bureaucracy, a start-up somewhere will come eat their lunch. The theory of natural market monopolies is a historical fallacy. Only with the government's assistance does a monopoly exist (such as a union, central bank, regulatory rights, etc). http://mises.org/daily/5266/The-Myth-of-Natural-Monopoly http://mises.org/daily/5266/The-Myth-of-Natural-Monopoly
- omouse 15y agoThe problem is that the startup will be acquired and thus absorbed into the bureaucracy or it will grow into that giant bureaucracy someday ;p But yeah, I see what you're saying.
- dhume 15y agoAs the userbase here tends towards software-based startups, people often forget that there are many markets where becoming a seller requires very large initial capital.
- 15y ago
- pnathan 15y agoAs someone who's worked retail and fast food, I think those types of locations are past-due for some serious labor effort. Those kinds of jobs have atrocious pay and - from what I could tell - required working overtime to pay one's bills (supposing you were living on under 12K/year) if you weren't a supervisor. Personally, I think if you work (around) 40 hours per week, you should be paid a living wage. That's going to vary based on location, but you shouldn't have to work more than 50 hours per week just to pay your (uber-frugal) bills. Well, that's my opinion on the matter.