18 ms·

Detailed, 6 step instructions on how to open a ballot and mark no? Thanks, amazon. This is almost as scummy as asking the city to change traffic lights so union

Detailed, 6 step instructions on how to open a ballot and mark no? Thanks, amazon. This is almost as scummy as asking the city to change traffic lights so union organizers have a harder time talking to workers in between shifts. https://www.al.com/business/2021/02/jefferson-county-now-says-traffic-lights-were-changed-near-amazon.html https://www.al.com/business/2021/02/jefferson-county-now-say...

deelowe 6y ago
I think an important detail that's needed here is how long the traffic back up issue has been a problem and when amazon requested it be change. If this has been an issue for years and amazon only recently requested the change, that's pretty scummy.
- sodality2 6y ago
  “This action was taken on Dec. 15, 2020 after being notified by Amazon of traffic delays. The action taken is routine for traffic signal operations, in that signal timing plans are adjusted to be as efficient as possible.” Doesn't say how long it was a problem though.
duxup 6y ago
I got instructions from more than one party this past fall on how to fill out a ballot and mail it early and etc.
- sodality2 6y ago
  Did they tell you which way to vote, though? And giving reasoning for why (this actually wouldn't surprise me)?
  - duxup 6y ago
    Yes they told me exactly who I should vote for and why.
    - sodality2 6y ago
      Hm. In my opinion that isn't as bad, but I can't put my finger on why. This is one reason: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26263866 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26263866
      - duxup 6y ago
        I thought it was weird, but I can't imagine a basis for not allowing that. Even if it was someone's boss... they too get to talk / have an opinion... even if I think it is wrong. I've certainly worked for employers who I thought had some very wrong ideas, I still did my own thing voting wise.
    - kedean 6y ago
      IMO the key difference is that you were getting mail from political parties. I think the correct comparison would be if the US government were sending you mail instructing you on how to vote for the party already in power. There's a big difference between the party pleading its case to you and the government itself endorsing that party. I think Amazon's power over employees makes it more like the latter, although neither is a perfect analogy. If I had gotten mailers last year directly from the United States government instructing me "how to re-elect Donald J. Trump", I would have been livid. Individual within the company should be able to make their case for why they think unionization is bad, but I don't think the company itself gets a say in this.
- rtpg 6y ago
  It wasn't your boss telling you how to do that though. The direct power imbalance is pretty different, I think.
  - SilasX 6y ago
    Then I don’t understand the outrage. What’s offensive about instructions on how to fill out a ballot above and beyond the fact of them asking you to vote no? The GGP seemed to think that there was something particularly bad about the detailed six page instructions. But the GP correctly pointed out they do the same thing in regular government elections (to milk as many voters as they can).
    - jakelazaroff 6y ago
      > What’s offensive about instructions on how to fill out a ballot above and beyond the fact of them asking you to vote no? Nothing. The outrage is about them telling you to vote no. If they were trying to help you fill out your ballot in good faith, there wouldn't be a problem.
      - SilasX 6y ago
        No. The OP was complaining about something already assuming they're telling you to vote no, meaning the OP was adding something on top of that. I was asking what that thing-on-top is. So it has to be something more than: >The outrage is about them telling you to vote no. Which, indeed, you correct yourself on in the next sentence, to say that the issue is that it pretends to be neutral ballot instructions, but, if followed, end in you voting no, and are thus misleading (just guessing -- again, no one here seems to be making it easy to understand what they're objecting to). If so, it would have been helpful for the OP to communicate that the first time around. Remember rtpg joined in to clarify, but actually objected to something else, the power imbalance -- and yet s/he seemed to believe s/he was agreeing with the initial comment! Not everyone can read minds about what a speaker thinks is the most salient part, and we don't deserve to be ridiculed for asking. If you want others to be outraged, it helps to clearly communicate what they're supposed to be outraged about -- starting form a clear model.
Dirlewanger 6y ago
Unbelievable. This is petty shit you'd expect from 100+ years ago when companies were breaking strikes by killing people. Might as well rename this country to the Corporate States of America. No level of government has any backbone against the private sector.
- marcinzm 6y ago
  Yes changing the timing of some traffic lights is exactly the same as killing people.
  - damnyou 6y ago
    Well, for its union busting efforts Amazon has been using spies from the literal, actual Pinkerton: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/amazon-pinkerton-spies-worker-labor-unions-2020-11%3famp https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/amazon-... Yes, it's the same Pinkerton that did this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike edit: Ah, I've been shadow banned. I probably offended the mods when I pointed out how much of a racist Scott Siskind was. Hey dang, you, by virtue of wanting to keep the community on this site over eradicating white supremacism from here — you are a white supremacist.
- w0m 6y ago
  That's a bit too far. Ignore unions; and amazon fixed traffic congestion leaving their complex. If a unionization effort is reliant on an unnecessary traffic jam to form - it's destined to fail.
throwawaysea 6y ago
Why is one group (union activists) allowed to take such action but the other group isn't? I am not sure I see anything "scummy" in this.
- sodality2 6y ago
  They are allowed to. That is why they did. Just as I am allowed to call them scummy for it
  - fastball 6y ago
    You know what they meant. Why is one scummy and the other not?
    - sodality2 6y ago
      Amazon is strong-arming workers into voting no with propaganda posters, unions typically hurt amazon (else why would they fight so hard against it), and typically help the workers. Do you not see the problem here? I don't mean to say unions are always right. I see anti-union sentiment from the very company that would be hurt by it to be very much allowed. But since I believe in worker's rights and can see firsthand how poorly they are treated, I see it as scummy.
      - s1artibartfast 6y ago
        Just to be clear, this is a double standard based on your priors. Vote No propaganda is bad because unions are good. Vote Yes propaganda is good because unions are good. If you are not convinced that unions age good in the first place, then it all falls apart.
        sodality2 6y ago
        >Just to be clear, this is a double standard based on your priors. >Vote No propaganda is bad because unions are good. >Vote Yes propaganda is good because unions are good. Double standard? Not really. Definitely not the peak of critical reasoning, though. But I'm not judging anti-union vs pro-union propaganda by anything but their motives. >If you are not convinced that unions age good in the first place, then it all falls apart. Ah, but I do. Not inherently, and not always. But net positive in my opinion. Sure, if I change my beliefs to contradict, it will not make sense. Just as if I believed unions were bad and net negative, union propaganda would be considered scummy but amazon propaganda wouldn't. I always try to judge critically, and in my personal opinion, pro vs anti has a clear benefit for the worker on one side. This doesn't mean I think the other shouldn't exist. I don't think that means a double standard, since in my eyes they aren't the same. If they were literally the same, say Amazon wanted the Yankees to win and the workers wanted the Red Sox to win, and I insisted on one side over the other, then it would be a double standard (like 1984, they do it = bad, we do the same thing = good).
fireball_blaze 6y ago
Also reference Amazon's "Do it without dues" site: https://www.doitwithoutdues.com/ https://www.doitwithoutdues.com/
- fxtentacle 6y ago
  Wow, just wow. "Don’t buy that dinner, don’t buy those school supplies, don’t buy those gifts because you won’t have that almost $500 you paid in dues." It seems Amazon's main argument for why people shouldn't join a union is that Amazon's wages are so low that they cannot financially afford to. That's almost like saying "You're too poor to fight for your rights. Know your place."
  - _jal 6y ago
    > "You're too poor to fight for your rights. Know your place." Well, yes. The goal of an antiunion campaign is the demoralization/ disempowerment of the workforce. Notice also the recent push for "experimental polities", AKA company towns.
    - CodeMage 6y ago
      St. Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go, I owe my soul to the company store.
    - nexthash 6y ago
      For context about "experimental polities" like the failed Toronto SideWalk labs [1], I've linked an article below [2]. [1] https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/07/sidewalk-labs-shuts-down-toronto-project/ https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/07/sidewalk-labs-shuts-down-t... [2] https://theconversation.com/will-silicon-valleys-new-company-towns-end-up-as-failed-utopias-94270 https://theconversation.com/will-silicon-valleys-new-company...
  - andrepd 6y ago
    "But higher wages can buy many dinners." "Explain how!" "Money can be exchanged for goods and services"
thiagocsf 6y ago
This site has an anti ad-block pop up that stops you from closing the browser window in iOS. Had to close the whole HN app to leave the in-app browser.

deelowe 6y ago

I think an important detail that's needed here is how long the traffic back up issue has been a problem and when amazon requested it be change. If this has been an issue for years and amazon only recently requested the change, that's pretty scummy.

sodality2 6y ago
“This action was taken on Dec. 15, 2020 after being notified by Amazon of traffic delays. The action taken is routine for traffic signal operations, in that signal timing plans are adjusted to be as efficient as possible.” Doesn't say how long it was a problem though.

duxup 6y ago

I got instructions from more than one party this past fall on how to fill out a ballot and mail it early and etc.

sodality2 6y ago
Did they tell you which way to vote, though? And giving reasoning for why (this actually wouldn't surprise me)?
- duxup 6y ago
  Yes they told me exactly who I should vote for and why.
  - sodality2 6y ago
    Hm. In my opinion that isn't as bad, but I can't put my finger on why. This is one reason: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26263866 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26263866
    - duxup 6y ago
      I thought it was weird, but I can't imagine a basis for not allowing that. Even if it was someone's boss... they too get to talk / have an opinion... even if I think it is wrong. I've certainly worked for employers who I thought had some very wrong ideas, I still did my own thing voting wise.
  - kedean 6y ago
    IMO the key difference is that you were getting mail from political parties. I think the correct comparison would be if the US government were sending you mail instructing you on how to vote for the party already in power. There's a big difference between the party pleading its case to you and the government itself endorsing that party. I think Amazon's power over employees makes it more like the latter, although neither is a perfect analogy. If I had gotten mailers last year directly from the United States government instructing me "how to re-elect Donald J. Trump", I would have been livid. Individual within the company should be able to make their case for why they think unionization is bad, but I don't think the company itself gets a say in this.
rtpg 6y ago
It wasn't your boss telling you how to do that though. The direct power imbalance is pretty different, I think.
- SilasX 6y ago
  Then I don’t understand the outrage. What’s offensive about instructions on how to fill out a ballot above and beyond the fact of them asking you to vote no? The GGP seemed to think that there was something particularly bad about the detailed six page instructions. But the GP correctly pointed out they do the same thing in regular government elections (to milk as many voters as they can).
  - jakelazaroff 6y ago
    > What’s offensive about instructions on how to fill out a ballot above and beyond the fact of them asking you to vote no? Nothing. The outrage is about them telling you to vote no. If they were trying to help you fill out your ballot in good faith, there wouldn't be a problem.
    - SilasX 6y ago
      No. The OP was complaining about something already assuming they're telling you to vote no, meaning the OP was adding something on top of that. I was asking what that thing-on-top is. So it has to be something more than: >The outrage is about them telling you to vote no. Which, indeed, you correct yourself on in the next sentence, to say that the issue is that it pretends to be neutral ballot instructions, but, if followed, end in you voting no, and are thus misleading (just guessing -- again, no one here seems to be making it easy to understand what they're objecting to). If so, it would have been helpful for the OP to communicate that the first time around. Remember rtpg joined in to clarify, but actually objected to something else, the power imbalance -- and yet s/he seemed to believe s/he was agreeing with the initial comment! Not everyone can read minds about what a speaker thinks is the most salient part, and we don't deserve to be ridiculed for asking. If you want others to be outraged, it helps to clearly communicate what they're supposed to be outraged about -- starting form a clear model.

Dirlewanger 6y ago

Unbelievable. This is petty shit you'd expect from 100+ years ago when companies were breaking strikes by killing people. Might as well rename this country to the Corporate States of America. No level of government has any backbone against the private sector.

marcinzm 6y ago
Yes changing the timing of some traffic lights is exactly the same as killing people.
- damnyou 6y ago
  Well, for its union busting efforts Amazon has been using spies from the literal, actual Pinkerton: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/amazon-pinkerton-spies-worker-labor-unions-2020-11%3famp https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/amazon-... Yes, it's the same Pinkerton that did this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike edit: Ah, I've been shadow banned. I probably offended the mods when I pointed out how much of a racist Scott Siskind was. Hey dang, you, by virtue of wanting to keep the community on this site over eradicating white supremacism from here — you are a white supremacist.
w0m 6y ago
That's a bit too far. Ignore unions; and amazon fixed traffic congestion leaving their complex. If a unionization effort is reliant on an unnecessary traffic jam to form - it's destined to fail.

throwawaysea 6y ago

Why is one group (union activists) allowed to take such action but the other group isn't? I am not sure I see anything "scummy" in this.

sodality2 6y ago
They are allowed to. That is why they did. Just as I am allowed to call them scummy for it
- fastball 6y ago
  You know what they meant. Why is one scummy and the other not?
  - sodality2 6y ago
    Amazon is strong-arming workers into voting no with propaganda posters, unions typically hurt amazon (else why would they fight so hard against it), and typically help the workers. Do you not see the problem here? I don't mean to say unions are always right. I see anti-union sentiment from the very company that would be hurt by it to be very much allowed. But since I believe in worker's rights and can see firsthand how poorly they are treated, I see it as scummy.
    - s1artibartfast 6y ago
      Just to be clear, this is a double standard based on your priors. Vote No propaganda is bad because unions are good. Vote Yes propaganda is good because unions are good. If you are not convinced that unions age good in the first place, then it all falls apart.
      - sodality2 6y ago
        >Just to be clear, this is a double standard based on your priors. >Vote No propaganda is bad because unions are good. >Vote Yes propaganda is good because unions are good. Double standard? Not really. Definitely not the peak of critical reasoning, though. But I'm not judging anti-union vs pro-union propaganda by anything but their motives. >If you are not convinced that unions age good in the first place, then it all falls apart. Ah, but I do. Not inherently, and not always. But net positive in my opinion. Sure, if I change my beliefs to contradict, it will not make sense. Just as if I believed unions were bad and net negative, union propaganda would be considered scummy but amazon propaganda wouldn't. I always try to judge critically, and in my personal opinion, pro vs anti has a clear benefit for the worker on one side. This doesn't mean I think the other shouldn't exist. I don't think that means a double standard, since in my eyes they aren't the same. If they were literally the same, say Amazon wanted the Yankees to win and the workers wanted the Red Sox to win, and I insisted on one side over the other, then it would be a double standard (like 1984, they do it = bad, we do the same thing = good).

fireball_blaze 6y ago

Also reference Amazon's "Do it without dues" site: https://www.doitwithoutdues.com/ https://www.doitwithoutdues.com/

fxtentacle 6y ago
Wow, just wow. "Don’t buy that dinner, don’t buy those school supplies, don’t buy those gifts because you won’t have that almost $500 you paid in dues." It seems Amazon's main argument for why people shouldn't join a union is that Amazon's wages are so low that they cannot financially afford to. That's almost like saying "You're too poor to fight for your rights. Know your place."
- _jal 6y ago
  > "You're too poor to fight for your rights. Know your place." Well, yes. The goal of an antiunion campaign is the demoralization/ disempowerment of the workforce. Notice also the recent push for "experimental polities", AKA company towns.
  - CodeMage 6y ago
    St. Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go, I owe my soul to the company store.
  - nexthash 6y ago
    For context about "experimental polities" like the failed Toronto SideWalk labs [1], I've linked an article below [2]. [1] https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/07/sidewalk-labs-shuts-down-toronto-project/ https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/07/sidewalk-labs-shuts-down-t... [2] https://theconversation.com/will-silicon-valleys-new-company-towns-end-up-as-failed-utopias-94270 https://theconversation.com/will-silicon-valleys-new-company...
- andrepd 6y ago
  "But higher wages can buy many dinners." "Explain how!" "Money can be exchanged for goods and services"

thiagocsf 6y ago

This site has an anti ad-block pop up that stops you from closing the browser window in iOS. Had to close the whole HN app to leave the in-app browser.