8 ms·

Unions don’t always contribute to a better outcome for their workers, and it looks like working conditions wasn’t a strong enough driver for the majority of the

Unions don’t always contribute to a better outcome for their workers, and it looks like working conditions wasn’t a strong enough driver for the majority of the workers. It’s hard to motivate a vote for unions when Amazon pays double the federal minimum wage.

noobermin 6y ago
Perhaps but this ignores the million+ dollar campaign Amazon leveraged to push people to vote no. It's not like it explains all the vote but it's definitely a component.
- musingsole 6y ago
  I have little expectation that a propaganda campaign could meaningfully shift worker-voter perspectives for this specific vote. They're working off of the old propaganda over the past decades and their perspectives on the ground. The recent ads and such we're seeing are about the greater narrative and trying to set the stage for union-votes 5-10 years from now.
_jal 6y ago
> Unions don’t always contribute to a better outcome for their workers You can say this about anything. Getting a job doesn't always contribute to a better outcome for the unemployed. Getting healthcare doesn't always contribute to better health outcomes. Getting housing after being homeless doesn't always lead to a better life. > It’s hard to motivate a vote for unions when Amazon pays double the federal minimum wage. So many people repeating the same things over and over.
- jimbob45 6y ago
  Yeah, but this is the problem with the current debate around unions. Pro-union individuals aren’t willing to say, “Unions have some serious drawbacks“ and anti-union individuals aren’t willing to say, “Unions solve some critical issues for modern employees”. Instead, both sides (rightfully) call each other out on their biases and no voter feels able to trust either side.
  - kethinov 6y ago
    That's a false dichotomy. The solution to a badly run union is to run it better, not dissolve it and surrender all your power to your boss, just as the solution to a badly run republic is to elect better leaders, not abandon democracy and go back to the bad old days of monarchy. Unions are workplace democracy. Opposing them is by definition supporting workplace monarchy.
    - lawnchair_larry 6y ago
      This is extremely ideological to the point of simply being untrue. The best outcome for everyone is no union and a supportive employer that gives you a fair deal so you don’t want one. Unions are a huge tradeoff and better as a last resort.
      - slantedview 6y ago
        > The best outcome for everyone is no union and a supportive employer that gives you a fair deal so you don’t want one This is extreme wishful thinking. The very nature of corporations like Amazon is in conflict with giving workers a "fair deal". Thus, exploitative labor practices exist.
      - kethinov 6y ago
        "The best outcome is no democracy and a benevolent king that gives you a fair deal so you don't want elections. Democracy has huge tradeoffs and is better only as a last resort." You're right. It's ideological. And you're on the wrong side of it.
      - 8fGTBjZxBcHq 6y ago
        I don't see how "you should just hope for an employer who is benevolent in spite of every possible economic incentive otherwise" is less idealogically motivated. But anyway yes in my case it is idealogical and I won't dispute that at all. Anything that reduces the power of companies or increases the power of works is something I favor regardless of political practicality.
- geodel 6y ago
  > So many people repeating the same things over and over. So you can tell something new. I am not sure if blue collar workers are looking for total revolution to overthrow this capitalistic system.
mjfl 6y ago
A lot of unions ended up being just another means for the mafia to steal from the poor, skimming off the top of pensions funds and the like. Similar corruption exists today. It is inevitable.
- atat7024 6y ago
  Which shark do you trust to protect you?
  - jhbadger 6y ago
    The one you can vote for leadership. Unions are imperfect, but they are democracies. Corporations on the other hand are feudal. You don't get to vote Bezos into power as a worker -- he's just the lord of the manor. Some nobles are good and some nobles are bad, but the serfs have no say.
    - lawnchair_larry 6y ago
      I hate how the term privilege is thrown around these days, but man, this bizarre narrative reeks of privilege and some marxist fantasy. Bezos is in his position because of his competency. He built the thing. Democracy is not a virtue in a workplace.
      - jhbadger 6y ago
        When people say a CEO "built" their company, I'm reminded of when people say the Pharoh Kufu "built" the Great Pyramid. It kind of ignores the people who did the actual work. He's the CEO because he had a lot of money from Wall Street and could hire his staff. He was never tested on his competency. The real world is not a meritocracy.
        mjfl 6y ago
        The employees of Amazon have never been slaves and the comparison is disingenuous. Saying he was never tested on his competency is ridiculous. There were literally millions of people in the USA richer than Bezos at the time he started Amazon. There are many people on Wall Street who were *orders of magnitude* richer than Bezos that tried to start internet companies that crashed and burned.

noobermin 6y ago

Perhaps but this ignores the million+ dollar campaign Amazon leveraged to push people to vote no. It's not like it explains all the vote but it's definitely a component.

musingsole 6y ago
I have little expectation that a propaganda campaign could meaningfully shift worker-voter perspectives for this specific vote. They're working off of the old propaganda over the past decades and their perspectives on the ground. The recent ads and such we're seeing are about the greater narrative and trying to set the stage for union-votes 5-10 years from now.

_jal 6y ago

> Unions don’t always contribute to a better outcome for their workers You can say this about anything. Getting a job doesn't always contribute to a better outcome for the unemployed. Getting healthcare doesn't always contribute to better health outcomes. Getting housing after being homeless doesn't always lead to a better life. > It’s hard to motivate a vote for unions when Amazon pays double the federal minimum wage. So many people repeating the same things over and over.

jimbob45 6y ago
Yeah, but this is the problem with the current debate around unions. Pro-union individuals aren’t willing to say, “Unions have some serious drawbacks“ and anti-union individuals aren’t willing to say, “Unions solve some critical issues for modern employees”. Instead, both sides (rightfully) call each other out on their biases and no voter feels able to trust either side.
- kethinov 6y ago
  That's a false dichotomy. The solution to a badly run union is to run it better, not dissolve it and surrender all your power to your boss, just as the solution to a badly run republic is to elect better leaders, not abandon democracy and go back to the bad old days of monarchy. Unions are workplace democracy. Opposing them is by definition supporting workplace monarchy.
  - lawnchair_larry 6y ago
    This is extremely ideological to the point of simply being untrue. The best outcome for everyone is no union and a supportive employer that gives you a fair deal so you don’t want one. Unions are a huge tradeoff and better as a last resort.
    - slantedview 6y ago
      > The best outcome for everyone is no union and a supportive employer that gives you a fair deal so you don’t want one This is extreme wishful thinking. The very nature of corporations like Amazon is in conflict with giving workers a "fair deal". Thus, exploitative labor practices exist.
    - kethinov 6y ago
      "The best outcome is no democracy and a benevolent king that gives you a fair deal so you don't want elections. Democracy has huge tradeoffs and is better only as a last resort." You're right. It's ideological. And you're on the wrong side of it.
    - 8fGTBjZxBcHq 6y ago
      I don't see how "you should just hope for an employer who is benevolent in spite of every possible economic incentive otherwise" is less idealogically motivated. But anyway yes in my case it is idealogical and I won't dispute that at all. Anything that reduces the power of companies or increases the power of works is something I favor regardless of political practicality.
geodel 6y ago
> So many people repeating the same things over and over. So you can tell something new. I am not sure if blue collar workers are looking for total revolution to overthrow this capitalistic system.

mjfl 6y ago

A lot of unions ended up being just another means for the mafia to steal from the poor, skimming off the top of pensions funds and the like. Similar corruption exists today. It is inevitable.

atat7024 6y ago
Which shark do you trust to protect you?
- jhbadger 6y ago
  The one you can vote for leadership. Unions are imperfect, but they are democracies. Corporations on the other hand are feudal. You don't get to vote Bezos into power as a worker -- he's just the lord of the manor. Some nobles are good and some nobles are bad, but the serfs have no say.
  - lawnchair_larry 6y ago
    I hate how the term privilege is thrown around these days, but man, this bizarre narrative reeks of privilege and some marxist fantasy. Bezos is in his position because of his competency. He built the thing. Democracy is not a virtue in a workplace.
    - jhbadger 6y ago
      When people say a CEO "built" their company, I'm reminded of when people say the Pharoh Kufu "built" the Great Pyramid. It kind of ignores the people who did the actual work. He's the CEO because he had a lot of money from Wall Street and could hire his staff. He was never tested on his competency. The real world is not a meritocracy.
      - mjfl 6y ago
        The employees of Amazon have never been slaves and the comparison is disingenuous. Saying he was never tested on his competency is ridiculous. There were literally millions of people in the USA richer than Bezos at the time he started Amazon. There are many people on Wall Street who were *orders of magnitude* richer than Bezos that tried to start internet companies that crashed and burned.