The fact that they have it on this blatant of a propaganda poster means that unions work.
And going through union for what you need is much more effective and quicker than letting a supervisor/manager drag their feet and kick the ball around, and that’s what makes union dues worth it.
The fact that they have it on this blatant of a propaganda poster means that unions work.
Not necessarily.
A poster this blatant means unions are bad for management.
It doesn’t prove that unions aren’t bad for both workers and management alike. Business isn’t a zero sum game. To show that something helps workers, you need to demonstrate that it helps workers.
Which is to say, this poster is a bad argument for unions. The success of the writers strike, on the other hand, is a good argument of how unions protect workers from the bad deals management offers.
People love to vote against themselves. At my last Union BBQ we had the local, anti Union conservative politician show up to shake hands. I saw so many of my union brothers taking photos with him, since like half of them are conservative voters.
Why the fuck a union worker would vote for anti Union, pro corporation conservatives, I don’t know. But they do.
They make union dues seem like a big deal, but not unionizing will cost you even more. A union will pay for itself when they negotiate a raise.
You have much fewer guarantees on pay, benefits, and work rules without a union on your side. Amazon can, and does, change policies at will. A union keeps them in check.
Bringing complaints directly to your supervisor or manager will solve nothing, and in the process, it will get you on their shit list. Sometimes, anonymity is priceless.
I’m very pro union. But not all unions are good. My father’s union is so bad he might actually be losing money. They just roll over for management to fuck them, barely negotiate anything at all. Last time, they ‘negotiated’ an increase in pay, and the increase was actually SMALLER than the increase in union dues.
Oh, and they only defend the worst of the worst. Litteral thief, stealing, caught on camera, multiple times ? Well defend you tooth and nails. 'Til the management litterally had to get police involved for them to back down.
Unions in general are good. But for some specific unions, ymmv.
100% agree. Some of my “favorites” are police unions, when they go to bat for obvious criminals. You or I would go to jail under the same circumstances, but those assholes don’t even get a reprimand, and still have authority over others.
Unions are meant to protect the people from overpowered companies. The police union instead protects an overpowered force against the will of the people.
The police unions are absolutely antithetical to the idea of unions as a whole
Costco is (afaik) not unionized, though the company is union friendly (there may be unionized stores?). They are publicly traded. And workers are paid better than a living wage and have a bunch of benefits.
The company chooses to do this despite their shareholder responsibility, and I will never shut up about it.
Once you’re getting a fair shake, if the company establishes trust, you can get rid of the union. And the company can save the money they spend trying to ruin your lives on something else instead. Not all companies are trash.
But most are.
It’s absolutely vital for governments to promote workers’ ability to unionize and provide employees with rights to protect them from corporate greed.
That’s because too many union members treat their union like a service being provided to them instead of something they’re providing for themselves. A union is what the members make it, and if people aren’t participating then yeah, it will probably suck.
Naw, more likely people only hear about the most dramatic examples. The every-day, my boss is picking on me stuff rarely gets much attention and is generally resolved quietly.
Litteral thief, stealing, caught on camera, multiple times ? Well defend you tooth and nails. 'Til the management litterally had to get police involved for them to back down.
The severity of the accusation shouldn’t disqualify someone from their union defending them. Also, for a criminal matter, why didn’t they go the police to begin with?
When it’s a low amount in theft, it’s more trouble involving police than just letting them go. It’s also on their record, barring them for future job and putting in legal problem
So it’s better for everyone involved. Unless union want to literally defend a thief
I pay around £15 per month in membership fees at my Union. But if it weren’t for them, I’d have lost my house when the energy companies hiked their prices, end everyone else did the same to compensate.
Was it garaunteed that they’d win these negotiations? No.
Would I have been better off begging to my managers? Fuck no.
I mean, it’s not many companies that don’t try to put up a fight against this. I don’t think this is anything particularly unusual. Why is this infuriating? Would you expect them to not do this? That would be /mildlyshocking
The contract the article is referring to JWCC which was a multi award contract. All of the vendors will essentially compete for the workloads under that contract throughout the entire contract.
It was created to replace JEDI which was single award and got so bogged down in legal challenges they gave up and replaced it with JWCC.
This is also technically true - except your union is going to collectively bargain a binding contract which gets you all those things, and prevents you from being exploited or the employer from randomly changing rules to exploit you.
You have no guarantees on pay, benefits or work rules without unions either. The company can change those at any time or never change them at all.
At least a union will fight for those things on your behalf. A company has no incentive to do so and will actively oppose such things if it hurts their bottom line even slightly.
Correct. Benefits can and do get cut frequently without unions. Benefits cannot be cut in a union under contract, and if they try to cut them on the next contract you have the power to collectively bargain and strike if they do not come to the table and bargain in good faith. The recent WGA strike is an excellent example of all of that.
“Dues deducted from paycheck” and “typically must go through union instead of your supervisor or manager” are true. At the same time, they’re minor inconveniences compared to what a bad employer does to you.
As I said in another comment, my dues are automatically paid through my PTO account which in turn is paid into by my employer. So yeah, it’s still my money, but it’s not coming out of my paycheck at all and I honestly don’t even notice it.
At least in my area, most of your big trade unions have this as an option for members through the IBEW credit union.
It’s not always necessary to ‘go through the union’ instead of speaking with your manager. For pay, conditions and other disputes, yes, you’d want the collective bargaining of a union to get the best deal. For other things, it’s not always necessary.
I had a fall at work a couple of years ago. I fractured my ankle and was away from work until it healed and I could work again. When I returned, the problem area that lead to my fall hadn’t been looked at. I raised it with management myself and they dealt with my concerns and rectified the issue. I informed my health and safety union rep of what I was doing and he agreed to take it up if necessary. It wasn’t.
The company I work for has a long history of working with unions. They obviously have their motivations to improve efficiency and profitability but generally aren’t arseholes about it. The toxic culture I see in other companies only comes about when bosses can get away with murder because employees aren’t able to stand together.
Given how big a shitshow Amazon is, both in fulfillment and corporate, I’m shocked that they weren’t the first tech company to fully unionise.
Well, I say that knowing that there are lots of people that are extremely anti-union, even those that have suffered due to RTO/RTT, or Amazon’s infamous PIP culture.
And I say this knowing that Amazon workers could happily form a union with 250k workers, and Amazon would happily fire them without a thought, even if it actively harmed them.
Always love it when the people in charge know something is bad for THEM but good for US and they just throw a tasteful graphic spouting some bullshit on a page to change minds. They did this in Columbus about Issue 1 like a month ago, saying how upping the Majority Vote to 60% for state bills was just a good thing, even though it was just to prepare for issue 1 in November to repeal backwards ass Abortion Laws. It was obvious too since it was like all the pamphlet talked about
Yes. Union staff needs to make a living too. It’s also how we pay members when we strike.
My union is also in Canada. How do you do it in your country?
In Spain, union staff is company staff. They get paid by the company. There are some rules about how much staff time a union gets depending on company size. If I remember properly it was about 1 full time employee per every 80 workers.
For striking, in Spain people just take the cut of that day or, depending on the sector, there are arrangements where workers strike and company still pays the same. Usually transport workers.
It sounds like you have a completely different system from that which exists in the Anglophone countries.
Here in the US and Canada we would never dream of having our union reps on the payroll of ownership.
That makes zero sense since it would mean that they would be relying on our signatory contractors for their paycheck when what we want is precisely the opposite; an independent union that can bargain on behalf of the membership
Having our unions funded and paid for by the membership is precisely the point since it means that it’s our union, not the company’s.
So does every other subscription "service.", but we don't talk about the vileness of a Netflix subscription do we?
No guarantees on pay, benefits, or work rules
This is just a lie. I cannot find another angle to it.
Even without a union, there is no guarantees on pay, benefits, or work rules. So the point is moot. It's like saying "Anything is possible" and walking away like you said something sagely.
Typically must go through union instead of your supervisor or manager
Most people wouldn't understand why this matters unless you've been apart of a job where your manager has defended you against your supervisors. Very few people have had this happen, but the idea is that you will have people that DEFEND YOU from your supervisors getting power hungry.
It's not even like your supervisor can't bring accusations against you, it just means that complaints would have to have merit.
Add comment