Amazon workers narrowly reject union in historic vote
Amazon workers narrowly reject union in historic vote
If the GMB had won it would have been the first time Amazon recognised a union in the UK.
49.5% to 50.5%
Some poor people really really love being cucked by rich people. Uggh
We don't judge people's kinks but this bootlicking is hard to swallow
We don't judge people's personal kinks no matter what they are, but we do judge them for trying to force their kinks onto others.
I find the notion of "votes to unionise" kinda weird. Like, shouldn't the nearly 50% of workers who want to unionise just be allowed to do it? Then half the workforce would be union, and that's enough to get some bargaining power, even if not as much as if everyone was. It should be their right to freedom of assembly to create a union even if only like five workers want to be in it.
This is where it’s important to remember who exactly is writing the laws for union recognition. Many countries have laws that nominally support the formation of unions but moreso exist to reduce union support or funnel unions into polite, legal activity.
Yeah boiii, you all can't go collectively making decisions without company and government permission! /s
Have to hand it to Bezos for his commitment to cartoonish supervillainy. Amazon resist unions the most aggressively out of any company out there, with employee mandatory training modules being anti-union propaganda and agitators facing disciplinary procedures. I'd even heard that their office workers can end up being battered by them too. Rumour about their Edinburgh office is that 20% of devs get PIP'd every year to keep them on their toes.
Starbucks would like a word
Amazon pulls all kinds of dirty tricks. Such as going on massive fire and hiring sprees right before the vote and pressuring all the new hires to vote no.
Thank God it's not EU
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The online giant would have been forced to negotiate with workers on issues such as pay and conditions.In a statement, Amazon said it placed "enormous value on engaging directly" with staff.
The process would include persuading the Central Arbitration Committee, which is in charge of overseeing applications for recognition, that the pool of workers eligible to vote had changed.
The GMB, which lost by 28 votes, said its drive for recognition fell “agonisingly short” and accused Amazon of “union-busting”.It said there were “anti-union messages by company bosses, including multiple anti-union seminars” at the warehouse.It added that “the fire lit by workers in Coventry and across the UK is still burning”, and that the union would “carry on the fight” for low paid workers.
It went on to organise a further 37 days of industrial action over the last year and by recruiting on the picket line, steadily built up its membership to more than 1,400 members out of the centre's estimated 3,000 plus workers.In April the union launched a legal challenge against Amazon, claiming it used underhand tactics to encourage members to cancel their union membership.On Wednesday it said that legal challenge would continue.
This is why we’ve always worked hard to listen to them, act on their feedback, and invest heavily in great pay, benefits and skills development," the firm added.The GMB says it is surprised by what it sees as the fearlessness of an overwhelmingly immigrant workforce, many of whom arrived recently from South Asia.
They say that in the beginning many were frightened to get involved but as the strikes wore on, and people saw that workers who’d joined picket lines weren’t facing disciplinary action, their confidence grew.The union is hopeful that the government will strengthen their power to organise.
The original article contains 872 words, the summary contains 293 words. Saved 66%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
lmao uk continues its slide into intolerable shitholedom
Or, UK amazon workers within .5% shift of unionising in the future.
Does amazon pay enough for half of these bootlickers to be satisfied?
Unions hurt productivity and in the long term make companies and countries less competitive.
A system where labor benefits from increased productivity needs to be found. Unions are not and have never been the answer
https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/UnionizationEconomicPerformance.pdf
Also, unions are regularly linked to criminal activity, strong arming, and organized crime
https://www.unionfacts.com/article/crime-and-corruption/
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1147700
Lots of people that blindly support the perceived short term benefits of unionization in Lemmy. But, this are facts whether you like them or not
Long term, unions are bad for everyone
Says while citing "studies" from the fraser institute, a libertarian think tank registered as a charity. Fuck them and fuck you for spreading their propaganda.
We have bad/corrupt governments sometimes, that doesn't mean we should get rid of governments. (Though maybe the libertarian Fraser institute might disagree with me there.)
Fascism under Mussolini was envisioned as the merger of state and corporate power.
I always find it interesting that right wing "libertarians" never seem to ask themselves what would happen if you abolished the state and left a power vacuum for corporations to fill, with no one capable of stopping them.
ROFL!!!
Dawg, you are in the wrong place to sell your bullshit.
Except most developed countries have strong unions and guess what, most everyone is happy with them and the workers actually have rights and get paid a fair wage. Only in the worker-trampling corporate-hellscape that is the US someone would think this nonsense.