5 ms·
What Apple is doing is literally illegal. Our department of labor is absolutely useless. If the DoL continues this way, people are going to unionize without do
by aaomidi 4y ago
What Apple is doing is literally illegal. Our department of labor is absolutely useless.
If the DoL continues this way, people are going to unionize without doing the "recognition" process. e.g. IWW
- itake 4y agoCan you cite a source for why this is illegal?
- aaomidi 4y agoSure! This is considered retaliation by announcing/offering "benefits" that are only available for non-unionized employees: https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/the-law/interfering-with-employee-rights-section-7-8a1 https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/the-law/in...
- otterley 4y agoAnd you don't think Apple has labor lawyers advising them differently? Are you a labor lawyer yourself, or are you just making your conclusion based solely on a summary of the law (which might not even apply to this particular situation) on a website, without access to case law?
- itake 4y agoEverything I see in that document says employers can NOT withhold benefits for employees in the process of organizing a union. I don't see anything about withholding benefits for employees already in a union. My understanding is that Apple has many stores starting the process of unionizing, but only the store that already has been unionized are the benefits been withheld. Apple seems to be compliant to the law you shared. Do you mind quoting which sentence?
- anamexis 4y agoI suspect they are getting confused with the NLRA Section 8(a)(1), which among other things prohibits employers from: > Withhold changes in wages or benefits during a union organizing campaign that would have been made had the union not been on the scene, unless you make clear to employees that the change will occur whether or not they select the union, and that your sole purpose in postponing the change is to avoid any appearance of trying to influence the outcome of the election. However, this is only relevant during the organizing campaign. Not after, as is the case here.
- aaomidi 4y ago> However, this is only relevant during the organizing campaign. Not after, as is the case here. Except there are unionizing efforts going on in a lot of their stores. So this is illegal for any of the stores that are currently in the progress of it, but have not yet committed to it.
- anamexis 4y agoIt would be illegal for them to withhold those benefits in those stores that have an active union campaign, but that's not what they are doing. I'm fairly confident in this (I was a union organizer who has gone through an NLRB election), but do you have any precedent suggesting otherwise?
- itake 4y ago> So this is illegal for any of the stores that are currently in the progress of it, but have not yet committed to it. The article says only the store that is unionized isn't getting the benefit. What am I missing here?
- aaomidi 4y agoIt’s the threat that if you unionize you won’t get these benefits.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- hacym 4y agoNo offense, but your “view” on labor law sounds untrained at best and dangerous at worse. Please stick to what you know.
- rat9988 4y agoWhy is he wrong?
- hacym 4y agoLabor laws are complex. No trained lawyer would make a comment saying something is “literally illegal” based on some article posted on an online forum. This should be a red flag on this opinion. That being said, companies do this all the time, at least in my experience. I’ve worked at multiple companies that employee union and non-union employees. Unionized workers have a contract, which is one of the things you’re accepting when you unionize. Companies can offer new benefits, but I think most assessments aren’t going to see this as “literally illegal”. Some of the benefit differences I’ve seen firsthand is the amount of PTO, sick leave, and education benefits. I’m not a lawyer in the least, and Apple may be breaking the law in some other way, but this seems like a normal practice based solely on the number of companies that employ it.
- aaomidi 4y ago
- kristopolous 4y agoThey also do wage theft all the time, unpaid overtime, ignore breaks required by law, withhold tips... Employer offenses against employees is rampant. As far as why this might be illegal, here's some background https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/starbucks-nonunion-worker-pay-bumps-raise-labor-law-red-flags https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily-labor-report/starbucks-n...
- hacym 4y agoI think the first two paragraphs of that article sums it up pretty well.