3 ms·

I don’t understand how this story is being framed as the union letting the workers down, when it is the employer who failed to pay the workers properly? And the

I don’t understand how this story is being framed as the union letting the workers down, when it is the employer who failed to pay the workers properly? And the Union has forced them to implement a workaround?

klyrs 3y ago
The article mentions a decertification effort by some members of the union, which currently has ~9.2k of 36k signatures required. https://decertifynrlca.com/ https://decertifynrlca.com/
- callalex 3y ago
  Yes, I understand that the workers are unhappy with the way their union has negotiated for them, but I don’t see how that’s relevant to the employer not paying the negotiated amount. Why is that a failure of the union like the article states?
  - klyrs 3y ago
    As far as I understand it, the decertification effort seems to be about a previous unpopular collective bargaining agreement. The issue that the article highlights is that the union agreed to a workaround that didn't work for everybody. I'm not convinced that enough people would be so inconvenienced by this workaround to move the needle on the (already weak-looking) decertification effort, personally.
  - Spooky23 3y ago
    A union is more important when you’re working for the Federal government or even some state or local government as they make and enforce the rules. For example, if you work for a state labor department… Public sector worker safety is regulated by… the state labor department. There’s an organizational bias to not rock the boat. Any Federal or quasi-federal agency is a dictatorship. Some rural mail carrier in Montana or New York is 50 layers away from someone who has the power to affect change. You need the union to represent your interests and short circuit the org. Outside of the federal space, if a company fucked up payroll, the state labor department would unleash significant pain on the company. USPS is tasked with policing USPS! If the union is failing some constituents, that’s going to drive a desire to get more effective representation. The benefit of focused representation may outweigh a smaller bargaining unit. (In general, it’s better to have 500,000 members than 50,000 members)
  - bobmcnamara 3y ago
    > but I don’t see how that’s relevant to the employer not paying the negotiated amount. Jalopnik ownership is notoriously anti-union. They take a lot of swings like this.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
dgrin91 3y ago
I think the union failure they are referencing is the weak accountability that the union is holding USPS to. The union signed off on this money order compromise even though it has significant disadvantages for the workers and gives full absolution to USPS. The root failure here is USPS no question, but the union response is weak.
bobmcnamara 3y ago
Jalopnik is owned by Gizmodo, who are notoriously anti worker and have been locked in mortal combat with the writer's guild for ages.
- zlg_codes 3y ago
  Aren't they all owned by Gawker, which was commandeered by Peter Thiel in the frivolous Hogan case? I wouldn't trust a Gawker site for any information.
  - bobmcnamara 3y ago
    Yes, but they were all sold off to Univision who made them into Gizmodo media group in 2016.
dahdum 3y ago
I doubt the union “forced” them, cutting checks manually is the standard practice for payroll screwups like this. I’ve seen it happen in a handful of companies, all but one outside their control. Two of them offered to cover any resulting overdraft fees. The Union stuff is backstory and fluff to fill out the article.

klyrs 3y ago

The article mentions a decertification effort by some members of the union, which currently has ~9.2k of 36k signatures required. https://decertifynrlca.com/ https://decertifynrlca.com/

callalex 3y ago
Yes, I understand that the workers are unhappy with the way their union has negotiated for them, but I don’t see how that’s relevant to the employer not paying the negotiated amount. Why is that a failure of the union like the article states?
- klyrs 3y ago
  As far as I understand it, the decertification effort seems to be about a previous unpopular collective bargaining agreement. The issue that the article highlights is that the union agreed to a workaround that didn't work for everybody. I'm not convinced that enough people would be so inconvenienced by this workaround to move the needle on the (already weak-looking) decertification effort, personally.
- Spooky23 3y ago
  A union is more important when you’re working for the Federal government or even some state or local government as they make and enforce the rules. For example, if you work for a state labor department… Public sector worker safety is regulated by… the state labor department. There’s an organizational bias to not rock the boat. Any Federal or quasi-federal agency is a dictatorship. Some rural mail carrier in Montana or New York is 50 layers away from someone who has the power to affect change. You need the union to represent your interests and short circuit the org. Outside of the federal space, if a company fucked up payroll, the state labor department would unleash significant pain on the company. USPS is tasked with policing USPS! If the union is failing some constituents, that’s going to drive a desire to get more effective representation. The benefit of focused representation may outweigh a smaller bargaining unit. (In general, it’s better to have 500,000 members than 50,000 members)
- bobmcnamara 3y ago
  > but I don’t see how that’s relevant to the employer not paying the negotiated amount. Jalopnik ownership is notoriously anti-union. They take a lot of swings like this.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

dgrin91 3y ago

I think the union failure they are referencing is the weak accountability that the union is holding USPS to. The union signed off on this money order compromise even though it has significant disadvantages for the workers and gives full absolution to USPS. The root failure here is USPS no question, but the union response is weak.

bobmcnamara 3y ago

Jalopnik is owned by Gizmodo, who are notoriously anti worker and have been locked in mortal combat with the writer's guild for ages.

zlg_codes 3y ago
Aren't they all owned by Gawker, which was commandeered by Peter Thiel in the frivolous Hogan case? I wouldn't trust a Gawker site for any information.
- bobmcnamara 3y ago
  Yes, but they were all sold off to Univision who made them into Gizmodo media group in 2016.

dahdum 3y ago

I doubt the union “forced” them, cutting checks manually is the standard practice for payroll screwups like this. I’ve seen it happen in a handful of companies, all but one outside their control. Two of them offered to cover any resulting overdraft fees. The Union stuff is backstory and fluff to fill out the article.