4 ms·
One vote cast in one warehouse doesn't necessarily represent the workforce as a whole. 1. That particular workforce is making above-market wages for their area
by function_seven 5y ago
One vote cast in one warehouse doesn't necessarily represent the workforce as a whole.
1. That particular workforce is making above-market wages for their area. They looked at what a union might be able to deliver and decided they didn't want to rock the boat.
2. Any single location voting for union representation knows that there's a good chance management will just shutdown the whole operation. Like Wal-Mart did. Amazon could easily jettison a "troublesome" warehouse and continue doing business. Game-theoretically, it would benefit them as a message to other locations that might be flirting with organizing.
I'm not sure what coercion you're seeing in their new strategy.
- adgjlsfhk1 5y agoIt's also worth noting that the NLSB is currently investigating Amazon for illegally pressuring workers to vote against unionizing.
- function_seven 5y agoTrue. I took the Bessemer results at face value in my comment, but of course there's also that possibility. Which kind of dovetails into #2 above. ("Boss says if this place unionizes, we're all out of a job")
- esyir 5y agoI'm definitely all for punitive measures on amazon if they're found guilty there. That also works invalidate the results in my book. That's an if, though.