Wellsy wrote:https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/16/technology/amazon-workers-against-union.html
Seems union peeps are too weak to be appealing.
I am unclear as to the point you are making. You write that the union people are too weak to be appealing. I grant you that the union did not appeal to the majority of the workers who voted. I do not understand what you mean by being too weak. I could guess that you are referring to the union's arguments are not strong enough to persuade more workers. If that is your meaning then I agree with you. The pay of $15 per hour is acceptable enough and they would not want to forfeit this as pay for manual workers in Alabama is low. This seems to be the determining factor. The half-hour break in a 10 hour shift makes working conditions unreasonable considering that half the time is used up by walking to and from the canteen. Tough luck. No-one speaks for the workers and will not be able to do so in the forseeable future because there is no representative of the work force to argue for better conditions. Do not expect any better conditions from a multi-billionaire owner of the company as long as workers will do their jobs for the pay scale on offer and medical insurance in a country where an illness can render working class people financially ruined unless they have medical coverage.
The New York Times article was poorly done as the reporter interviewed only people who voted against unionization. How come? This is odd coming from a newspaper that is unionized.
- By JohnRawls
- By skinster