12 ms·

Union's evidence in Amazon vote 'could be grounds for overturning election'

103 points by throwawaysea 6y ago

drannex 6y ago
I wish them the best, it needs to happen.
dannyw 6y ago
Amazon is offering competitive wages (especially for Albama's cost of living), and benefits from day one. Maybe a majority of the workers there prefer the status quo?
- sammorrowdrums 6y ago
  I would be willing to listen to that line of argument, but having seen the Amazon manager training videos, the doitwithoutdues.com site, the countless other articles, evidence and anecdotes about Amazon's particularly aggressive forms of trying to prevent unionisation, the twitter ambassadors tweeting the official talking points etc. I don't think we can rule out the possibility we don't actually know what the employees truly think because they're in the middle of an all out propaganda war. And I certainly don't think Amazon would put so much effort into fighting this if their employee treatment, benefits and compensation and general employer track record made employees genuinely not even consider the Union option. As an outsider, it just feels like watching media reporting a war. I don't trust it due to propaganda and clearly opposing biases at play between the interested parties.
  - refurb 6y ago
    Voting goes the way I think it should = people rationally voted for their best interest despite all the propaganda Voting doesn't go the way I think it should = people were clearly swayed by propaganda and didn't vote in their best interest Either we treat people like adults and trust their voting or we don't. One doesn't get to pick and choose which voting is "right".
    - Dobbs 6y ago
      In the article it was made very clear that this wasn't about propaganda, what is being alleged is that they have evidence that Amazon threatened and coerced people into voting against the union. Propaganda may or may not be dirty, but threats of firings, plant closure, etc if the Union passes is illegal. Very very different.
      - refurb 6y ago
        Did you read the comment I was replying to? It wasn’t talking about threats it was talking about Amazon’s anti-union campaign.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - jiminymcmoogley 6y ago
      Lots of propaganda and dark pattern stuff I saw with my own two eyes used in the campaign, and now possibly even coercion (compulsion to act involuntarily under threat of force) = people may or may not have voted rationally in their best interest despite or because of all the propaganda. my opinion on the result irrelevant either way. in fact i dont even need to mention it, it's that irrelevant. the outcome of the election itself was compromised and there is no magic time travel button to find out what would have happened if we did it over. therefore we must take the results at face value and just really really hope as hard as we can that this is the same outcome as it would have been otherwise Not lots of propaganda and dark pattern etc etc = people rationally voted for their best interest, again regardless of my opinion on the result Either we treat elections like they matter and dont unduly manipulate the outcome or we don't. One doesn't get to pick and choose which elections are "questionably carried out"
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    > And I certainly don't think Amazon would put so much effort into fighting this if their employee treatment, benefits and compensation and general employer track record made employees genuinely not even consider the Union option. You can say the same thing about any political campaign! Do you think people must not really want Joe Biden as president because he had to spend $6 billion to persuade them through campaigning?
    - nraynaud 6y ago
      it's a bit different, voting for a Democrat president is excluding the Republican one. When you vote for an union, you absolutely do not vote for your employer to become an asshole, it's not "either the union make the employer improve employees work OR the employer does it on its own". The union and the employer could create an alliance to make life better for the employees. Look at what police unions and conservative towns have done, unionized policemen can literally get away with murder. There is no exclusive choice as to who should plan bathrooms breaks for runners and drivers: either the employer, or the union, as long as people stop having to pee in a bottle, you could even have a coalition with a giant conspiracy to have employee go to the bathroom when they need to.
    - hnbad 6y ago
      > Do you think people must not really want Joe Biden as president because he had to spend $6 billion to persuade them through campaigning? Unironically, yes. But that doesn't mean they would have wanted Trump.
  - wdn 6y ago
    One of my neighbor works fir Amazon warehouse here in NJ, he is quite happy, never heard him complain about it. Yeap, I agreed with you. The media is untrustworthy and is a propaganda machine. Good thing is they are digging their own grave now.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - rovr138 6y ago
      Have you looked at social media? Most people live by appearances and fake a lot of emotions. Not saying this is the case with your neighbor, but if they’re just a neighbor, not a close friend, they might simply not feel okay talking about it with you.
    - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
      I despise my job, but I'm unskilled and considering my pay, benefits, and responsibilities it's the best compromise I've found. I'd tell you, and my coworkers, that I'm happy. But I'm lying and no one wants to hear me complain about the bad hand life has dealt me so I put my face on and pretend, like just about everyone else.
  - bko 6y ago
    The union is free to pay Amazon employees $15 an hour to watch their propaganda videos. This paternalism of low wage employees needs to stop. They can make up their own mind and actually have skin in the game as opposed to some tech worker making 10x as much telling them they're being brainwashed
    - geofft 6y ago
      Why are you deeply concerned about paternalism from tech workers who aren't even in contact with the employees in question and are just posting on a message board, and not concerned about potentially-illegal paternalism from the bosses of the employees?
    - claudiawerner 6y ago
      Of course they can make up their own mind - but simply pointing out the existence of propaganda and other factors at play, and the fact that ideology plays a large role in our lives, does not imply 'brainwashing' as much as ideological forces. The tug-of-war between labour and capital has been raging for centuries, and at no time hitherto is it more visible that it has graduated to the ideological battlefield when Amazon starts putting up posters and training their employees on otherwise hilarious videos to push their point of view. And I think anyone should point that out - whether it's a union organizer in Alabama, a tech worker making 10x the salary (who, by the way, may also have an interest in improving cultural support for unions if they are a tech worker in favour of software engineer unions) or a historian on capital-labour relations. As far as I know, however, no tech worker has contacted anyone in Alabama and told them they're brainwashed. 'Paternalism' would be someone pushing the ballot for them 'for their own interests'. That does not preclude discussion of priorities, rationality, and the rational frameworks (epistemological/ideological/moral/practical/etc.) we have available to discuss how wise those decisions are.
      - refurb 6y ago
        ”simply pointing out the existence of propaganda” Why do you assume only you can see that’s it’s propaganda and they can’t?
- andybak 6y ago
  Maybe. Maybe not. Once it's determined whether this was a fair vote, we'll know for sure I guess. > The RWDSU submitted nearly two dozen objections to Amazon's conduct during the election, which it said prevented employees from a "free and uncoerced exercise of choice" on whether to create the company's first U.S. union.
- robobro 6y ago
  As an iww organizer with friends across the US in Amazon warehouse management and on the ground- no Unions are just bringing democracy into capitalism. How can any red blooded American oppose them? Edit: not sure why I'm being down voted, did I say something offensive??
  - esyir 6y ago
    You have democracy in your capitalism already, that's what your elected government and their regulations are.
    - gspr 6y ago
      And who's to say that that has to be the only one? (Except that there's not even just one; there's a wide range of elections from the national level, to the local, or even maybe down to your city block in some places).
  - chrisseaton 6y ago
    > Unions are just bringing democracy into capitalism. How can any red blooded American oppose them? Well they had a democratic vote and decided they did not want to be represented by this union. That's democracy working.
    - Dobbs 6y ago
      In the article it is made very clear that what is being alleged is that it wasn't a democratic vote. What is being alleged is that Amazon threatened to close the warehouse, and/or fire people based upon how they vote. Something that if I understand correctly is illegal, and even if not illegal is definitely not a democratic vote.
      - chrisseaton 6y ago
        > If you read the article It's against the site rules here to suggest people haven't read the article - please don't do this. I was replying to a parent comment which said 'how can anyone oppose a union'. Some people legitimately don't want to have to deal with a union, for any of many reasons. For example because the union supports political goals they don't agree with, or because the union favours other employees over them, or they just don't want to have to deal with two overlords, neither of which may be working to their benefit. If they're asked and they say 'no thanks' then the union should just say 'ok thanks for letting us know' and leave them alone. There's a weird attitude amongst unions that there is no possible way anyone could not want to be represented by them. That leads them to accuse any vote against them of being illegitimate.
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  I try not to have a strong opinion about amazon workers, because I am not an amazon worker, so it isn't my business. If they want to unionised, that's their right, if not, that's their right too. That said, I was deeply unsurprised by the result of the vote. I looked at the pay and benefits and thought "I wouldn't rock the boat if I were them". It seems odd to me that people think a union would be popular here. Unions I've dealt with were a nightmare of politics and ineffectiveness. Partly that's their own problem, partly its a result of legal frameworks that they're stuck in. I was also surprised how much of a fuss people made about Amazon when 101 other companies are worse and older and get a free pass (Walmart still has more employees than amazon in the US I think). I think this and other issues around big tech (Google and competition, Apple and supply chains) are more about their failures to engage in PR than them actually being worse than average. I wonder if we will see a move from all/any of them to plug this gap in their moats
- MomoXenosaga 6y ago
  One analysis in a local newspaper was something that blew my mind: in the US your health insurance is tied to your employer?!. Just think about how absolutely insane that is. Your boss has life or death power over you and your loved ones. Apparently that's how Amazon was able to threaten it's workers.
  - djbebs 6y ago
    There is nothing stopping you from buying your own health insurance. You used to be able to go without, but thanks to Obama care that is now not an option, and you are forced to do business with insurers
    - enkid 6y ago
      Imagine a world where being able to not have access to healthcare is a good thing.
      - IntelMiner 6y ago
        Americans always say it should be "their choice" and I just feel like I'm staring at an incomplete jigsaw puzzle Like. It's your choice to...go bankrupt or die from a treatable illness? I don't know what they expect non-Americans to draw from that line of reasoning
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
        infamia 6y ago
        Before WWII, people in the U.S. bought catastrophic insurance and generally paid for their medical care out of pocket without much trouble. This kind of insurance was around $80/month or less in my state before Obamacare was implemented (it doubled after that). Before WWII, everyone simply paid for common Doctor visits and relied on their insurance for larger bills. After WWII, the US made gave employers tax incentives to provide insurance, which in hindsight was a huge mistake.
- zelon88 6y ago
  "Competitive" wages are a form of slavery. It means you don't truly consider the employees value. You just pay him 15 cents more than the guy down the street.
  - Jyaif 6y ago
    But then the guy down the street will have no one to employ, so he'll have to pay 15 cents more than the other guy, and so on and so forth.
- geofft 6y ago
  Maybe! If so, a free, fair, and legal vote will tell us that!
- heymijo 6y ago
  > Maybe a majority of the workers there prefer the status quo? Analysis showed this is what happened. Please don't mistake that to mean the status quo is good. There is an enormous power imbalance between Amazon and the laborers in Bessemer, Alabama. This has happened many, many times throughout American history. Coal towns are a canonical example of holding all the cards against labor. The hallmarks of that relationship exist here.
  - pydry 6y ago
    IIRC amazon managed to swing it so the cohort voting was dominated by newbies who got hit only by the anti union propaganda, hadn't yet suffered the worst excesses from management and were keen to not rock the boat and lose the job they'd just gotten.
    - heymijo 6y ago
      That’s good context. Thank you. It speaks to the power imbalance.
- Kneecaps07 6y ago
  If this is what the workers got without a union, imagine how much better it could be with a union negotiating on their behalf?
- Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
  >Amazon is offering competitive wages (especially for Albama's cost of living), and benefits from day one. No. Amazon does not. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/18/business/economy/amazon-wages-alabama-union.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/18/business/economy/amazon-w... >The most recent figure for the median wage in greater Birmingham, a metropolitan area of roughly one million people that includes Bessemer, was nearly $3 above Amazon’s pay there, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
  - LatteLazy 6y ago
    Exactly. You can work at amazon with zero skills and be only 3 dollars behind the median of a population full of doctors and lawyers...
LatteLazy 6y ago
>The RWDSU alleged that Amazon's agents unlawfully threatened employees with closure of the warehouse if they joined the union and that the company emailed a warning it would lay off 75% of the proposed bargaining unit because of the union. Amazon denies this. Especially the email, either that happened or it didn't. Either way someone needs to go to jail for perjury.
williesleg 6y ago
Like what happened to trump eh?
apples_oranges 6y ago
I just finished Sam Walton's Book "Made in America". It's about Walmart, but I heard somewhere it's required reading for all Amazon managers. Anyway, it's a fantastic book, and there's something about their Anti-Union stance in it: "I have always believed strongly that we don’t need unions at Wal-Mart. Theoretically, I understand the argument that unions try to make, that the associates need someone to represent them and so on. But historically, as unions have developed in this country, they have mostly just been divisive. They have put management on one side of the fence, employees on the other, and themselves in the middle as almost a separate business, one that depends on division between the other two camps. And divisiveness, by breaking down direct communication, makes it harder to take care of customers, to be competitive, and to gain market share." I just post this because I the vibe in discussions on those union-related posts always seems so aggressive and stand-offish.. It's good to understand many perspectives before picking a side, if any. (Also this is just an excerpt, there's much more about employee compensation in the book.)
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  Are Walmart "associates" particularly well off as a result?
  - knute 6y ago
    I think it's important to remember that Sam Walton died in 1992, and the Walmart of today has very little in common with the Wal-Mart of 1992.
  - eventualhorizon 6y ago
    Walmart was a very different company under Sam Walton. Sam tried to visit every store once a year. When he got there he would throw the managers out and talk with the employees to find whether or not the managers were doing their jobs. He also believed in empowering the employees. Employees were responsible for particular sections of the store and had access to sales and inventory data and made decisions about how the section was run. In short Mr. Walton felt that the line employees were the most important people in the organization and treated them accordingly. This of course did not survive after he passed and Walmart employees are not well off today. The quote about Unions above does seem to fit his philosophy but rings hollow with the changes that occurred after his death.
offtop5 6y ago
Isn't it a completely rational fear that Amazon would just fire most employees if they unionize against Amazon's wishes. Even if this isn't exactly legal, it would take years to sort it out in court. Rent's due Monday, no one has time to wait for justice to prevail
- mikepurvis 6y ago
  Well yes, but that sort of precariousness and the obviousness of the power imbalance between the parties is precisely what makes a union so necessary in the first place.
- ceejayoz 6y ago
  Yes, it's a rational fear. There should probably be GDPR-style "significant percentage of corporate global revenue" penalties available in these scenarios.
- refurb 6y ago
  Why do you think it would take years? The NLRB has been known to interject during strikes when either side is breaking the law. It’s not like they can’t act quickly.
  - offtop5 6y ago
    Rent's still due Monday. Hypothetically let's say Amazon is found to be at fault, even if action is taken your still out of work. I consider myself fairly educated, and I still have no idea what remedies exist if Amazon was to close a warehouse due to unionization. For working class people who are more concerned about paying their bills, voting for a union sounds like a very risky proposition. There's a very good chance Amazon would find a legal trick to either lay off a significant numbers of their staff, or convert some workers to being tempts
    - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
      This sounds like fear mongering. How often do union votes result in closures?
roody15 6y ago
Once upon a time Republicans represented the managerial and investor class and Democrats represented labor (1920’s-1990’s). Now the corporate DNC is just pro mega corps with lip service to corporate safe “progressive” topics that don’t challenge their power. Identity politics etc. Sorry more of a rant here but I don’t see unions getting much help anytime in the press or national stage and doubt Apple, Google, Wal mart and Amazon will see any real movement towards unionization. It’s almost like a movie script... see we were open to the idea of unions ... but the people “chose” not to unionize ... wink.
- jl2718 6y ago
  Unions will eventually find ways to persist symbiotically with big business by making it impossible to do small business.
mk81 6y ago
I've seen this one before. It goes laches, no standing and moot.
Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
America is lacking a strong militant labor movement. The kind of movement like we saw in Venezuela, or from environmental activists. Chain yourself to your truck, machine, or desk with 5,000 of your comrades and go on a hunger strike prepared to get beat up and flung around by the local pd for a great a-roll. Coordinate with local press to have camera crews in there 24/7 live streaming everything. Since it's a strike, have everyone get busy on social media engaging in the public discourse and sharing dank memes.
bell-cot 6y ago
My impression (over a few decades) is that news stories about a unionization vote (won, lost, or upcoming) near-always proclaim the employer's "vote no" campaign to be exceptionally aggressive and underhanded. Perhaps my news sources quietly ignore the ~99% of unionization votes where such is not the case. But I suspect that both pro- and anti-union readers feel quite flattered by such characterizations, and so journalists have learned to proclaim that in near-all their stories upon the subject. Whether or not that suspicion is correct, I get the impression that even a slightly-competent union would have fully expected Amazon to fight hard and nasty in this case. A couple stories (from seemingly-pro-union sources) seemed to say that the location was one which Amazon would have chosen, if they had to face a union vote. Compared to other Amazon warehouses, this one paid notably less-bad wages (relative to the local job market), had notably less-evil managers (again, relative), etc. If that's vaguely correct, then how can the union's decision to fight in Bessemer, AL be explained? "The union is a sock puppet of Amazon's, and losing was the secret plan..." sounds cool. But there are many different unions in this world. Perhaps while a noisy one was picking and losing a fight in Bessemer, the savvier ones were quietly continuing with their own plans for Amazon.
jjtheblunt 6y ago
Do Amazon employees get a worse deal from the union than from Amazon, via its scale (i.e., healthcare rates, etc)?

103 points by throwawaysea 6y ago

I wish them the best, it needs to happen.

Amazon is offering competitive wages (especially for Albama's cost of living), and benefits from day one. Maybe a majority of the workers there prefer the status quo?

sammorrowdrums 6y ago
I would be willing to listen to that line of argument, but having seen the Amazon manager training videos, the doitwithoutdues.com site, the countless other articles, evidence and anecdotes about Amazon's particularly aggressive forms of trying to prevent unionisation, the twitter ambassadors tweeting the official talking points etc. I don't think we can rule out the possibility we don't actually know what the employees truly think because they're in the middle of an all out propaganda war. And I certainly don't think Amazon would put so much effort into fighting this if their employee treatment, benefits and compensation and general employer track record made employees genuinely not even consider the Union option. As an outsider, it just feels like watching media reporting a war. I don't trust it due to propaganda and clearly opposing biases at play between the interested parties.
- refurb 6y ago
  Voting goes the way I think it should = people rationally voted for their best interest despite all the propaganda Voting doesn't go the way I think it should = people were clearly swayed by propaganda and didn't vote in their best interest Either we treat people like adults and trust their voting or we don't. One doesn't get to pick and choose which voting is "right".
  - Dobbs 6y ago
    In the article it was made very clear that this wasn't about propaganda, what is being alleged is that they have evidence that Amazon threatened and coerced people into voting against the union. Propaganda may or may not be dirty, but threats of firings, plant closure, etc if the Union passes is illegal. Very very different.
    - refurb 6y ago
      Did you read the comment I was replying to? It wasn’t talking about threats it was talking about Amazon’s anti-union campaign.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - jiminymcmoogley 6y ago
    Lots of propaganda and dark pattern stuff I saw with my own two eyes used in the campaign, and now possibly even coercion (compulsion to act involuntarily under threat of force) = people may or may not have voted rationally in their best interest despite or because of all the propaganda. my opinion on the result irrelevant either way. in fact i dont even need to mention it, it's that irrelevant. the outcome of the election itself was compromised and there is no magic time travel button to find out what would have happened if we did it over. therefore we must take the results at face value and just really really hope as hard as we can that this is the same outcome as it would have been otherwise Not lots of propaganda and dark pattern etc etc = people rationally voted for their best interest, again regardless of my opinion on the result Either we treat elections like they matter and dont unduly manipulate the outcome or we don't. One doesn't get to pick and choose which elections are "questionably carried out"
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  > And I certainly don't think Amazon would put so much effort into fighting this if their employee treatment, benefits and compensation and general employer track record made employees genuinely not even consider the Union option. You can say the same thing about any political campaign! Do you think people must not really want Joe Biden as president because he had to spend $6 billion to persuade them through campaigning?
  - nraynaud 6y ago
    it's a bit different, voting for a Democrat president is excluding the Republican one. When you vote for an union, you absolutely do not vote for your employer to become an asshole, it's not "either the union make the employer improve employees work OR the employer does it on its own". The union and the employer could create an alliance to make life better for the employees. Look at what police unions and conservative towns have done, unionized policemen can literally get away with murder. There is no exclusive choice as to who should plan bathrooms breaks for runners and drivers: either the employer, or the union, as long as people stop having to pee in a bottle, you could even have a coalition with a giant conspiracy to have employee go to the bathroom when they need to.
  - hnbad 6y ago
    > Do you think people must not really want Joe Biden as president because he had to spend $6 billion to persuade them through campaigning? Unironically, yes. But that doesn't mean they would have wanted Trump.
- wdn 6y ago
  One of my neighbor works fir Amazon warehouse here in NJ, he is quite happy, never heard him complain about it. Yeap, I agreed with you. The media is untrustworthy and is a propaganda machine. Good thing is they are digging their own grave now.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - rovr138 6y ago
    Have you looked at social media? Most people live by appearances and fake a lot of emotions. Not saying this is the case with your neighbor, but if they’re just a neighbor, not a close friend, they might simply not feel okay talking about it with you.
  - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
    I despise my job, but I'm unskilled and considering my pay, benefits, and responsibilities it's the best compromise I've found. I'd tell you, and my coworkers, that I'm happy. But I'm lying and no one wants to hear me complain about the bad hand life has dealt me so I put my face on and pretend, like just about everyone else.
- bko 6y ago
  The union is free to pay Amazon employees $15 an hour to watch their propaganda videos. This paternalism of low wage employees needs to stop. They can make up their own mind and actually have skin in the game as opposed to some tech worker making 10x as much telling them they're being brainwashed
  - geofft 6y ago
    Why are you deeply concerned about paternalism from tech workers who aren't even in contact with the employees in question and are just posting on a message board, and not concerned about potentially-illegal paternalism from the bosses of the employees?
  - claudiawerner 6y ago
    Of course they can make up their own mind - but simply pointing out the existence of propaganda and other factors at play, and the fact that ideology plays a large role in our lives, does not imply 'brainwashing' as much as ideological forces. The tug-of-war between labour and capital has been raging for centuries, and at no time hitherto is it more visible that it has graduated to the ideological battlefield when Amazon starts putting up posters and training their employees on otherwise hilarious videos to push their point of view. And I think anyone should point that out - whether it's a union organizer in Alabama, a tech worker making 10x the salary (who, by the way, may also have an interest in improving cultural support for unions if they are a tech worker in favour of software engineer unions) or a historian on capital-labour relations. As far as I know, however, no tech worker has contacted anyone in Alabama and told them they're brainwashed. 'Paternalism' would be someone pushing the ballot for them 'for their own interests'. That does not preclude discussion of priorities, rationality, and the rational frameworks (epistemological/ideological/moral/practical/etc.) we have available to discuss how wise those decisions are.
    - refurb 6y ago
      ”simply pointing out the existence of propaganda” Why do you assume only you can see that’s it’s propaganda and they can’t?
andybak 6y ago
Maybe. Maybe not. Once it's determined whether this was a fair vote, we'll know for sure I guess. > The RWDSU submitted nearly two dozen objections to Amazon's conduct during the election, which it said prevented employees from a "free and uncoerced exercise of choice" on whether to create the company's first U.S. union.
robobro 6y ago
As an iww organizer with friends across the US in Amazon warehouse management and on the ground- no Unions are just bringing democracy into capitalism. How can any red blooded American oppose them? Edit: not sure why I'm being down voted, did I say something offensive??
- esyir 6y ago
  You have democracy in your capitalism already, that's what your elected government and their regulations are.
  - gspr 6y ago
    And who's to say that that has to be the only one? (Except that there's not even just one; there's a wide range of elections from the national level, to the local, or even maybe down to your city block in some places).
- chrisseaton 6y ago
  > Unions are just bringing democracy into capitalism. How can any red blooded American oppose them? Well they had a democratic vote and decided they did not want to be represented by this union. That's democracy working.
  - Dobbs 6y ago
    In the article it is made very clear that what is being alleged is that it wasn't a democratic vote. What is being alleged is that Amazon threatened to close the warehouse, and/or fire people based upon how they vote. Something that if I understand correctly is illegal, and even if not illegal is definitely not a democratic vote.
    - chrisseaton 6y ago
      > If you read the article It's against the site rules here to suggest people haven't read the article - please don't do this. I was replying to a parent comment which said 'how can anyone oppose a union'. Some people legitimately don't want to have to deal with a union, for any of many reasons. For example because the union supports political goals they don't agree with, or because the union favours other employees over them, or they just don't want to have to deal with two overlords, neither of which may be working to their benefit. If they're asked and they say 'no thanks' then the union should just say 'ok thanks for letting us know' and leave them alone. There's a weird attitude amongst unions that there is no possible way anyone could not want to be represented by them. That leads them to accuse any vote against them of being illegitimate.
LatteLazy 6y ago
I try not to have a strong opinion about amazon workers, because I am not an amazon worker, so it isn't my business. If they want to unionised, that's their right, if not, that's their right too. That said, I was deeply unsurprised by the result of the vote. I looked at the pay and benefits and thought "I wouldn't rock the boat if I were them". It seems odd to me that people think a union would be popular here. Unions I've dealt with were a nightmare of politics and ineffectiveness. Partly that's their own problem, partly its a result of legal frameworks that they're stuck in. I was also surprised how much of a fuss people made about Amazon when 101 other companies are worse and older and get a free pass (Walmart still has more employees than amazon in the US I think). I think this and other issues around big tech (Google and competition, Apple and supply chains) are more about their failures to engage in PR than them actually being worse than average. I wonder if we will see a move from all/any of them to plug this gap in their moats
MomoXenosaga 6y ago
One analysis in a local newspaper was something that blew my mind: in the US your health insurance is tied to your employer?!. Just think about how absolutely insane that is. Your boss has life or death power over you and your loved ones. Apparently that's how Amazon was able to threaten it's workers.
- djbebs 6y ago
  There is nothing stopping you from buying your own health insurance. You used to be able to go without, but thanks to Obama care that is now not an option, and you are forced to do business with insurers
  - enkid 6y ago
    Imagine a world where being able to not have access to healthcare is a good thing.
    - IntelMiner 6y ago
      Americans always say it should be "their choice" and I just feel like I'm staring at an incomplete jigsaw puzzle Like. It's your choice to...go bankrupt or die from a treatable illness? I don't know what they expect non-Americans to draw from that line of reasoning
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - infamia 6y ago
        Before WWII, people in the U.S. bought catastrophic insurance and generally paid for their medical care out of pocket without much trouble. This kind of insurance was around $80/month or less in my state before Obamacare was implemented (it doubled after that). Before WWII, everyone simply paid for common Doctor visits and relied on their insurance for larger bills. After WWII, the US made gave employers tax incentives to provide insurance, which in hindsight was a huge mistake.
zelon88 6y ago
"Competitive" wages are a form of slavery. It means you don't truly consider the employees value. You just pay him 15 cents more than the guy down the street.
- Jyaif 6y ago
  But then the guy down the street will have no one to employ, so he'll have to pay 15 cents more than the other guy, and so on and so forth.
geofft 6y ago
Maybe! If so, a free, fair, and legal vote will tell us that!
heymijo 6y ago
> Maybe a majority of the workers there prefer the status quo? Analysis showed this is what happened. Please don't mistake that to mean the status quo is good. There is an enormous power imbalance between Amazon and the laborers in Bessemer, Alabama. This has happened many, many times throughout American history. Coal towns are a canonical example of holding all the cards against labor. The hallmarks of that relationship exist here.
- pydry 6y ago
  IIRC amazon managed to swing it so the cohort voting was dominated by newbies who got hit only by the anti union propaganda, hadn't yet suffered the worst excesses from management and were keen to not rock the boat and lose the job they'd just gotten.
  - heymijo 6y ago
    That’s good context. Thank you. It speaks to the power imbalance.
Kneecaps07 6y ago
If this is what the workers got without a union, imagine how much better it could be with a union negotiating on their behalf?
Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
>Amazon is offering competitive wages (especially for Albama's cost of living), and benefits from day one. No. Amazon does not. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/18/business/economy/amazon-wages-alabama-union.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/18/business/economy/amazon-w... >The most recent figure for the median wage in greater Birmingham, a metropolitan area of roughly one million people that includes Bessemer, was nearly $3 above Amazon’s pay there, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  Exactly. You can work at amazon with zero skills and be only 3 dollars behind the median of a population full of doctors and lawyers...

LatteLazy 6y ago

>The RWDSU alleged that Amazon's agents unlawfully threatened employees with closure of the warehouse if they joined the union and that the company emailed a warning it would lay off 75% of the proposed bargaining unit because of the union. Amazon denies this. Especially the email, either that happened or it didn't. Either way someone needs to go to jail for perjury.

williesleg 6y ago

Like what happened to trump eh?

apples_oranges 6y ago

I just finished Sam Walton's Book "Made in America". It's about Walmart, but I heard somewhere it's required reading for all Amazon managers. Anyway, it's a fantastic book, and there's something about their Anti-Union stance in it: "I have always believed strongly that we don’t need unions at Wal-Mart. Theoretically, I understand the argument that unions try to make, that the associates need someone to represent them and so on. But historically, as unions have developed in this country, they have mostly just been divisive. They have put management on one side of the fence, employees on the other, and themselves in the middle as almost a separate business, one that depends on division between the other two camps. And divisiveness, by breaking down direct communication, makes it harder to take care of customers, to be competitive, and to gain market share." I just post this because I the vibe in discussions on those union-related posts always seems so aggressive and stand-offish.. It's good to understand many perspectives before picking a side, if any. (Also this is just an excerpt, there's much more about employee compensation in the book.)

ceejayoz 6y ago
Are Walmart "associates" particularly well off as a result?
- knute 6y ago
  I think it's important to remember that Sam Walton died in 1992, and the Walmart of today has very little in common with the Wal-Mart of 1992.
- eventualhorizon 6y ago
  Walmart was a very different company under Sam Walton. Sam tried to visit every store once a year. When he got there he would throw the managers out and talk with the employees to find whether or not the managers were doing their jobs. He also believed in empowering the employees. Employees were responsible for particular sections of the store and had access to sales and inventory data and made decisions about how the section was run. In short Mr. Walton felt that the line employees were the most important people in the organization and treated them accordingly. This of course did not survive after he passed and Walmart employees are not well off today. The quote about Unions above does seem to fit his philosophy but rings hollow with the changes that occurred after his death.

offtop5 6y ago

Isn't it a completely rational fear that Amazon would just fire most employees if they unionize against Amazon's wishes. Even if this isn't exactly legal, it would take years to sort it out in court. Rent's due Monday, no one has time to wait for justice to prevail

mikepurvis 6y ago
Well yes, but that sort of precariousness and the obviousness of the power imbalance between the parties is precisely what makes a union so necessary in the first place.
ceejayoz 6y ago
Yes, it's a rational fear. There should probably be GDPR-style "significant percentage of corporate global revenue" penalties available in these scenarios.
refurb 6y ago
Why do you think it would take years? The NLRB has been known to interject during strikes when either side is breaking the law. It’s not like they can’t act quickly.
- offtop5 6y ago
  Rent's still due Monday. Hypothetically let's say Amazon is found to be at fault, even if action is taken your still out of work. I consider myself fairly educated, and I still have no idea what remedies exist if Amazon was to close a warehouse due to unionization. For working class people who are more concerned about paying their bills, voting for a union sounds like a very risky proposition. There's a very good chance Amazon would find a legal trick to either lay off a significant numbers of their staff, or convert some workers to being tempts
  - Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago
    This sounds like fear mongering. How often do union votes result in closures?

roody15 6y ago

Once upon a time Republicans represented the managerial and investor class and Democrats represented labor (1920’s-1990’s). Now the corporate DNC is just pro mega corps with lip service to corporate safe “progressive” topics that don’t challenge their power. Identity politics etc. Sorry more of a rant here but I don’t see unions getting much help anytime in the press or national stage and doubt Apple, Google, Wal mart and Amazon will see any real movement towards unionization. It’s almost like a movie script... see we were open to the idea of unions ... but the people “chose” not to unionize ... wink.

jl2718 6y ago
Unions will eventually find ways to persist symbiotically with big business by making it impossible to do small business.

mk81 6y ago

I've seen this one before. It goes laches, no standing and moot.

Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y ago

America is lacking a strong militant labor movement. The kind of movement like we saw in Venezuela, or from environmental activists. Chain yourself to your truck, machine, or desk with 5,000 of your comrades and go on a hunger strike prepared to get beat up and flung around by the local pd for a great a-roll. Coordinate with local press to have camera crews in there 24/7 live streaming everything. Since it's a strike, have everyone get busy on social media engaging in the public discourse and sharing dank memes.

bell-cot 6y ago

My impression (over a few decades) is that news stories about a unionization vote (won, lost, or upcoming) near-always proclaim the employer's "vote no" campaign to be exceptionally aggressive and underhanded. Perhaps my news sources quietly ignore the ~99% of unionization votes where such is not the case. But I suspect that both pro- and anti-union readers feel quite flattered by such characterizations, and so journalists have learned to proclaim that in near-all their stories upon the subject. Whether or not that suspicion is correct, I get the impression that even a slightly-competent union would have fully expected Amazon to fight hard and nasty in this case. A couple stories (from seemingly-pro-union sources) seemed to say that the location was one which Amazon would have chosen, if they had to face a union vote. Compared to other Amazon warehouses, this one paid notably less-bad wages (relative to the local job market), had notably less-evil managers (again, relative), etc. If that's vaguely correct, then how can the union's decision to fight in Bessemer, AL be explained? "The union is a sock puppet of Amazon's, and losing was the secret plan..." sounds cool. But there are many different unions in this world. Perhaps while a noisy one was picking and losing a fight in Bessemer, the savvier ones were quietly continuing with their own plans for Amazon.

jjtheblunt 6y ago

Do Amazon employees get a worse deal from the union than from Amazon, via its scale (i.e., healthcare rates, etc)?