Hacker News Reader

Comment by wiredone | Hacker News Reader

I really don’t understand this push tbh. Amazon is already the industry leader in pay and benefits for these roles. Why was this needed?

In 2022, the only time I tend to see a union do anything, it’s to disrupt and create mob like holds on things (shipping, trucking etc). There seems to be waaay more corruption in anything union related than without.

Can someone seriously explain why this is needed or a good thing? Who actually wins in Amazons case outside of corrupt, power hungry union leaders who get to create roles for themselves?

View on HN

Pay and Benefits are one thing. Working conditions are another. You can pay me 15 an hour (Only $30K a year) but if I have to pee in a bottle or don't have enough schedule consistency to see my kids it's not worth it.

Amazon may pay well for now, but let's be honest, Amazon is a monopolistic project. What happens when there's less competition than there is right now? Do you think wages stay where they're at without some kind of pressure?

A union is the only ways employees can have any real power in the workplace. Democratically run unions give employees real negotiating power over what it means to go to work day to day. Unions are not perfect but what group of humans ever is?

I'd take a union job over a non-union job any day of the week.

> Democratically run unions give employees real negotiating power over what it means to go to work day to day.

I've been part of a few and this has never been the case in my experience.

I’ve been sound a few and have seen the same. The wannabe politicians and “negotiators” that are attracted to these union roles are the bullies or powerbrokers from middle school who tend to love the power that comes from those roles. They’re also actively motivated to be at odds with the employer which tends to make them part of the problem not the solution.

I genuinely see this as bad for online retail.

My wife was in a union and was able to decline membership. She was straight up bullied/harassed by her union-belonging peers when she left (saving some serious cash — relatively speaking — by not having to pay dues anymore).

Nothing about her job changed when she left the union.

I have no issues with unions, provided the employees have the choice to belong. But there’s the rub many (most?) states require membership (and dues) if there’s a union. And that’s never sat right with me.

If everyone could reape the benefits but don't pay there would be no unions.

Did your wife also try to skip paying taxes? Do you have "no problems with taxes as long as they're not mandatory"?

> If everyone could reape the benefits but don't pay there would be no unions.

Right to work states exist for this reason, and they do fine. Unions in a right to work state are not mandatory.

Spent a long time in Australian mines, some are heavily unionised, what you say is right it does attract the most toxic people, but at the same time even the truck drivers earn a fantastic living they can use to support a family. This is only possible because of the decades of strong unions negotiating better pay so the mines had to share the wealth. So to answer your question, the poorest people in the company benefit, despite the toxicity it can create.

> but at the same time even the truck drivers earn a fantastic living they can use to support a family. This is only possible because of the decades of strong unions negotiating better pay so the mines had to share the wealth.

How is this to do with unions and not just lack of labor supply, i.e. lack of people with a right to work in Australia who also want to be a truck driver in the middle of nowhere.

This effort started over unsafe COVID working conditions. Not dying at work seems like a win.

15$/hr ~ 30k$/year - That doesn't sound like a lot to be honest.

Not a lot sure. But WAY above minimum wage in many many states.

These aren’t highly skilled jobs. They come with healthcare and leave benefits. That’s game changing. Yet people seem enraged… I just don’t get it.

Are you suggesting that

* Those workers should not earn more, a union would make them earn more, therefore they should not unionize

Or that

* The union would not make those workers earn more, therefore they should not unionize

Perhaps it's your privilege blinding you? Just a thought.

You act like minimum wage is fair.

$20 minimum wage would be more keeping in line with historic buying power.

Can someone provide examples of when unions are bad?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com