Apple Store Workers in Atlanta Are the First To Formally Seek a Union (nytimes.com) 124
Employees at an Apple store in Atlanta filed a petition on Wednesday to hold a union election. If successful, the workers could form the first union at an Apple retail store in the United States. From a report: The move continues a recent trend of service-sector unionization in which unions have won elections at Starbucks, Amazon and REI locations. The workers are hoping to join the Communications Workers of America, which represents workers at companies like AT&T Mobility and Verizon, and has made a concerted push into the tech sector in recent years. The union says that about 100 workers at the store -- at Cumberland Mall, in northwest Atlanta -- are eligible to vote, including salespeople and repair technicians, and that over 70 percent of them have signed authorization cards indicating their support. In a statement, the union said Apple, like other tech employers, had effectively created a tiered work force that denied retail workers the pay, benefits and respect that workers earned at its corporate offices.
unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:3)
unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha
Re:unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:5, Insightful)
You act like union membership hasn't been chipped away at for decades upon decades, it's been under 25% for decades now along with a majority of states being "right to work" so if anything the open labor market has overseen far more of the exodus of middle class jobs. It's a contributing factor but let's not be so reductive, there are lots of shitty policies but it deserves to be noted unions were a primary opposition to things like NAFTA while business owners were is biggest proponents.
https://www.crainscleveland.co... [crainscleveland.com]
https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2... [bls.gov]
https://www.npr.org/2013/12/17... [npr.org].
Retail work is still work. In my opinion if you work 40 hours a week at any job you should be able to afford to live a life some basic dignity in the city or town where that job is located. Call it a stepping stone sure, you can and should aspire for more but that fact remains.
Re: unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:2)
Many Low-level jobs will never approach 40hours/week, thanks to the Democrat's brilliant plan to insure everyone in the US by forcing them buy 'subsidized' health insurance. Part of their "plan" to make employers provide subsidized health coverage for any worker with 32 or more hours/week,
It didn't take employers long to realize the government was encouraging them to reduce worker hours to something less than 32 hours/week.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that's bad, so let's just get rid of the idea of tying ones healthcare to ones job right?
Re: unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:2)
How? Democrats started with a clean sheet of paper, interviewed the heads of health insurance companies, and implemented the plan those CEOs suggested - force everyone to buy private healthcare.
Current government plans won't ramp-up, and below-cost of service medicare reimbursements will *literally* kill the health care industry.
Re: unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:2)
You know you're making the case for single payer health care right? I'm more of a multipayer/German type system but go nuts man.
Re: (Score:2)
It's hard to get to below cost when things are typically marked up more than 1000%. When healthcare organizations say something is below cost, they mean below an imaginary cost that they have never actually paid. Even the costs they DO pay are based on a manufacturer's rapacious mark up.
Re: unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:2)
Itâ(TM)s more complex than that.
The only businesses that can afford those low costs are monolithic corporations who make special deals with manufacturers and suppliers. The rest of the world without that buying power still pay at those higher markups.
There are no local health care providers any more because insurance made deals with big corps for advantageous payout schemes. Big corporate providers employed loss leaders to obliterate the local markets. They are able to do this because they extract mone
Re: (Score:2)
There are no local health care providers any more because insurance made deals with big corps for advantageous payout schemes.
And therein lies the problem. No 'payout scheme' should be described as 'advantageous'. It should be payment owed for services rendered at fair market rates.
You see it all day long... I see my doctor for an 8 minute session to get meds for my bronchitis that's not going away. Looking at the billing... $450 to my insurance? Come on, that's $3375.0 an hour.
Re: (Score:2)
That sounds like a great point in favor of full-on socialized medicine.
Re: (Score:2)
Insurance probably paid them $150. And if they're in-network that's all they will get. A cash payer would probably get away with paying $200. On no planet will they collect the full $450 for that 8 minute session.
Re: (Score:2)
Insurance probably paid them $150. And if they're in-network that's all they will get. A cash payer would probably get away with paying $200. On no planet will they collect the full $450 for that 8 minute session.
Right... I know how that part works as well. But the sheer fact that billing goes above and beyond what the actual service is worth shows you how messed up and broken the system is.
If the facility billed $150, then insurance would pay $75... the fact that they have to overbill to get paid properly is ridiculous.'
And also the fact that in some situations it's less money to pay in cash for a procedure than what it would cost through insurance (depends on the facility). Obviously more money out of pocket to
Re: (Score:2)
How many ways can you be WRONG in one post?
Show me the GOP wanting a national healthcare system, like every other developed country has (including, I understand, both Ukraine and Russia).
Your boys have fought it tooth and nail for decades.
And you think the ACA "forced" employers to keep from hiring full-time people so that they didn't have to provide healthcare? Then why has WalMart done that for decades, long before the ACA? And WalMart has whole programs to tell their employees how to apply for food stamp
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, they're called "part time jobs".
We all only get 168 hours a week. If 1/3 of those are for sleeping and 1/3 go to working for your employer then the other 1/3 belongs to the person and they should not have to sacrifice that to work more to live or train more to work more to attain some level of dignity.
That's a moral view on my part to be fair but it's one I stick to. 40 hours means you can afford rent, food, healthcare and utilities in the town your job is in. I'm not saying luxury or even middle c
and some places had 39.5 hours as "part time" jobs (Score:2)
and some places had 39.5 or even 39.9 hours as "part time" jobs.
So no more getting full time out of people but holding like 30 min or less under it to get out of paying for full time.
Re: (Score:3)
That's stupid, there aren't enough "actual careers" for people WITH the skills, let alone for tens of millions of low-level jobholders to move on up.
Re: (Score:2)
How far down your diaglog tree did I have to get before it came to shameful and mafia. Don't sputter out of talking points too quickly now.
Re: (Score:2)
What talking points? Unions are traditionally run by the mafia because they are extortionists. . .
Man you should quit while you're ahead. Just five cents worth of free advice. I mean you do you, but you're going into hyper drive on that digging downward thing.
Re: (Score:2)
What talking points
Proceeds to ramble on the same, unproven, emotional talking points
No one is buying it except for the young or terminally stupid. You are the latter now but you used to be both.
High five me god that was a zinger! Put that one up higher on the list.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
What exactly do unions do for workers these days? My wife is forced to be in one as a nurse. The only thing they do is protect the workers that need to be fired from being disciplined. The ones that ignore patient privacy regulations. The ones that never chart. The ones that put patients lives at risk. The ones that make the jobs of everyone else (also union members) harder.
Unions served a purpose. The results of that are now encoded in labor laws. Now all they do is latch on to your paychecks, prot
Re: (Score:3)
WILKES-BARRE — Registered nurses at Geisinger Wyoming Valley Medical Center (GWV) and Geisinger South Wilkes-Barre (GSWB) — members of SEIU Healthcare Pennsylvania — voted unanimously on Wednesday to approve a new three-year union contract with Geisinger Health. [timesleader.com]
The new contract includes enhanced paid time off policies like mental health days for nurses as well ‘historic’ wage increases aimed at keeping RNs at the bedside and recruiting new nurses to both facilities.
The wage inc
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. Do a search on "highest paid union official", and you see that the head of the AFL-CIO makes almost $200k/yr LESS than the President of the US ($440k/yr). Now, I read that Musk is getting a $26M bonus this year.
Re: unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:1)
Being very well-paid in Wilkes Barre, PA is not the same as being well-paid in say San Francisco, Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, etc.
Look at a map, you'll see where Wilkes Barre, PA is.
Re: unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:2)
Who said it was? If it's good for the area they live in that's what matters.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What talking points? Unions are traditionally run by the mafia because they are extortionists who extort the middle class worker for protection from the big bad employers. It is just another racket being run on the middle and lower class workers. The scam has been run before and they are trying it again on the younger generation. Are you going to claim that the mafia does not run unions? Leftists are devoid of facts. Unions are not your friend. The teachers union has proven that. Go read your DC think tank blogs and tell us what the facts are again. No one is buying it except for the young or terminally stupid. You are the latter now but you used to be both.
Have you read any actual history on this? Or have you just come up with talking points out of the either that have no basis in fact. "Traditionally run by mafia" Are you out of your mind?
*Some* unions have been run by mafia or mafia intermediaries but this is in no way the norm. Check out union formation from the late 1800's and early 1900s. Do some reading on Butte Montana during the copper boom or literally any other place in that time period. Unions were clearly started to represent the workers be
Re: (Score:2)
You're probably another one who think corporations can be "leftists".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you are completely ignorant about this subject, like you are, just not responding to a slashdot post is an option. Just wanted to let you know that.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, say *what*? You mean the move, under Raygun, and Bush, Sr, then the GOP control of Congress most of Clinton's years, and the Shrub, who watched the ultrawealthy move jobs overseas, because the GOP cut the top brackets of income tax, and cut corporate taxes massively, so they could move them overseas for ROI!
Notice all the jobs the Former Guy created? Yeah, well, neither do I.
Re: (Score:1)
Most people will admit that unions once served a function and brought about good change. The problem is, they've outlived their value and are nothing more than a money sucking parasite on worker's wages that enrich the union brass.
Re: unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:2)
Progressives like labor unions unless it's a police union. They believe they police shouldn't be allowed to have collective bargaining.
Re: unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:4, Interesting)
Aren't police unions actual proof that they can work though? Protect their members, assure good pay and benefits? We can argue about scope and methods for any union but fact is police unions get their job done no?
Re: unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:2)
I don't know of any police that get paid well.
Re: (Score:2)
Police work can be one of the best-paid professions in the United States. [usnews.com]
According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the 2020 median salary for a police officer was US$67,290 – more than one-third higher than the national median of $48,769 for all occupations. Many officers probably earn much more, because the bureau's analysis is based on hourly wages for a typical work year of 2,080 hours and does not include overtime – one of the factors that can drive an officer's yearly income even hi
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Anyone: Can we have a generous welfare state with solid benefits and protections for workers?
Conservatives: No
Anyone: Ok, in that case can workers organize together into groups and negotiate for those things from their employers?
Conservatives: No
Re: (Score:2)
I wondered why they suddenly care about the middle class, now I know. They've been given their talking points.
Re: (Score:2)
I have no problems with people willfully joining a union. It's your right to do something I believe is stupid. I do object to all workers being forced to join a union. I do object to a union whose workers are forced to join and fund it using those funds to support political parties in which paying members disagree with.
If unions provided any actual value to modern day employees, I might support them. I see no evidence of such. Just old, tired arguments like the 40 hour work week. If unions disappeared
Re: (Score:2)
Ity's funny how conservatives say "If you don't like it, don't work there" until the it that isn't liked is a union. Suddenly it's "There outta be a law!".
Re: (Score:2)
If unions disappeared tomorrow, the things the early labor movement won would not go away. Not everything that serves a purpose serves a purpose forever.
Yeah it's not like there is any rampant wide-spread abuse of employees or anything. Good thing I have this bottle here I could piss in while I wrote this post.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:2)
Interesting, though the article frames this as if it's a recent change, and that may be very region specific. My understanding for a long time is that low pay is a big part of the reason why police precincts around the US have been unable to maintain adequate staffing:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/02... [cnn.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah like all public service police pay is going to be better in some areas. Large cities with the largest forces though tend to be very well paid. California ranks #1 and even though NYC has a middling starting salary once they add benefits and overtime and night shifts etc a lot of officers pull over $100k. The suburbs like Long Island and Nassau county have some officers getting over $200k even though those are generally low crime but high wealth areas.
On the median though cops are paid pretty well an
Re: unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:5, Informative)
Police: Fatal injuries in 2016: 14.6 per 100,000 workers
Grounds Maintenence Workers: Fatal injuries in 2016: 17.4 per 100,000 workers
Drivers/Sales Workers and Truck Drivers: Fatal injuries in 2016: 24.7 per 100,000 workers
Protect our boys!
But seriously, police do tend to get hurt a lot on the job, but they are compensated fairly for that work and they do have guaranteed pensions and benefits for after their retirement so they don't have to work a beat into their old age. I wonder what organization makes sure that happens? Hmm, a bloomin mystery it is...
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
How about Paulo Morgado, Police Officer 3, who's figured out how to game the system so well that he took home total pay & benefits adding up to $712,802.36. He's the worst example, but they are public employees so their pay is public data. And there are plenty more there who are nearly as bad.
https://transparentcalifornia.... [transparen...fornia.com]
Re: (Score:1)
No. They're pretty much the canonical example of unions infested with corruption and overt malfeasance that have long since ceased to the public interest but, instead, merely advance their own political power. The country would be far better off without them.
Re: unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:5, Interesting)
I am not making a moral judgement on the conduct of police unions or any union. Just saying all unions are bad is as pointless as saying "all businesses are bad", we are talking about a structure here.
Point is are they effective at securing good pay and benefits for their members? I would say yes. Are they in need of reform due to the special circumstances police stand in society? Absolutely but fact is their unions get their job done because they have very strong sectoral power.
We can get into the weeds of public versus private unions and how we regulate both of them to strike a balance between labor and capital after we can agree on the fact that unions get better pay and benefits for members, police included.
Re: (Score:2)
I am not making a moral judgement on the conduct of police unions or any union. Just saying all unions are bad is as pointless as saying "all businesses are bad", we are talking about a structure here.
Yes, and the very structure of a union leads to corruption. It's basically a cartel of workers, and cartels always damage the market, regardless of which side, whether workers or businesses, create them.
Re: unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:2)
Then we also have to dissolve all corporate structures and the whole idea of stock ownership.
Re: (Score:3)
Protect their members
That's kind of the problem though. In America unions exist to protect their members at the expense of all others. In many other parts of the world unions drove change through legislation making themselves irrelevant.
Given the choice between a union that works for me if and only if I happen to be associated with a competent and noncorrupt union, or simply living in a country where we have actual labour laws to protect workers (unlike this "at will state" bullshit that exists in America), I'll happily take th
Re: unions are why we have 40 hour work and osha (Score:2)
I can agree to that, the alternative for workers without unions is government regulation.
However the reason unions formed in the later 19th century was because there were few laws for workers.
Also do you really think the people who have an anti union stance here or anywhere are making the case for increased regulation and legislation?
That'd be nice but a majority of the anti union sentiment is just a backhanded way for them so say "bootstraps"
Re: (Score:2)
Also do you really think the people who have an anti union stance here or anywhere are making the case for increased regulation and legislation?
Well... I am. The only union shops I've ever worked for were shitholes. But again my experience is moderated by the context of where I worked. We had very strong labour laws. The only thing unions brought to the table was the inability to fire underperforming vegetables.
I have an extreme (though clearly not representative of everyone) example. I worked at a biscuit factory in my youth. One of the guys (union member) got into an argument and punched another guy in the face. The company started the dismissal
Re: (Score:2)
I understand your point-of-view but how would regulation to prevent companies from firing people without proper cause look different than a union?
Most unions do have specific criteria tht must be met to fire a member although it can probably go overboard, but legislation is going to have to strike the same balance which would reolve around like your story showed, corroborating evidence.
I think right now having unions are better than not as a maority of states operate "at-will" which is the exact opposite, a
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't police unions actual proof that they can work though?
Only if you are in the right kind of job. Though I realise we can thank trade unions for making life better for most workers, with reasonable working hours, sick pay, etc., their effectiveness in negotiating pay and conditions depends very much on whether the threat of strike action is a usable bargaining tool. It obviously is in the case of drivers on the London Underground, because if they go on strike, the city grinds to a halt. But what about elderly care nurses? Apart from anything else, care workers d
Re: (Score:2)
Progressives don't have a problem with police union collective bargaining for salary/benefits/etc.
They have a problem with police cover-up culture and everything that goes along with it, of which many police unions actively perpetuate and support.
Gross generalisation, but:
An OSHA investigation is welcomed by trade unions.
An IA investigation is blocked as much as possible by police unions.
Re: (Score:2)
Progressives don't have a problem with police union collective bargaining for salary/benefits/etc.
They have a problem with police cover-up culture and everything that goes along with it, of which many police unions actively perpetuate and support.
Gross generalisation, but:
An OSHA investigation is welcomed by trade unions.
An IA investigation is blocked as much as possible by police unions.
The difference is that an OSHA investigation is not likely to result in fines or criminal charges to the trade union members even if a trade union member did something wrong and caused an accident, it will likely result in fines for their employer and mandatory training for all employees.
An IA investigation DOES have the possibility of resulting in fines, criminal charges, demotion and years of a police union member's life spent fighting the results if the IA investigation finds something wrong (and just be
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Public schools are in the shape they are in because of inadequate funding and the "charter" schools run by right wingnuts to siphon off their funds. Most government workers are diligent and work hard. But they have a difficult job because they must deal with the sainted American public who approach them like they are the enemy. Unions worked fine until management decided to ship jobs overseas and "right-to-work" states thought it would be good to screw the unions because management really has the workers be
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But mah freedom!
Re: (Score:2)
Half agree. The relationship between an employer and an employee should be one of cash. Employee provides labor, employee gets cash from employer. Everything we call benefits should be the responsibility of the state and funded out of taxpayer money.
So an employer couldn't offer a better health care plan to entice workers to come or stay working for them? You take the plan they state offers and if it doesn't cover your needs you are SOL? The VA provides a great example of how well that works in the long run (or Medicare where other patients subsidize medicare patients because Medicare doesn't pay enough to cover the costs of keeping the doors open)...
As a side note, government caused employer provided healthcare in the first place, the government set p
Re: (Score:2)
You drank an awful large amount of cool-aid if you think medicare doesn't cover the reasonable cost of healthcare including a fair profit.
Re: (Score:2)
You drank an awful large amount of cool-aid if you think medicare doesn't cover the reasonable cost of healthcare including a fair profit.
That is what I am told by friends who work behind the scenes in a healthcare system (ie: upper management and billing).
Between the lower reimbursement rates, the higher overhead costs due in part to higher levels of rejected claims (often for no real reason and those claims often get approved when resubmitted with no changes) and the higher amounts of care that the patients need (due to the average age of medicare patients vs patients with private insurance) they say that they break even at best and often l
Re: (Score:2)
upper management and billing).
To be fair these are the people with the most to lose in a single payer or more universal system.
Between the lower reimbursement rates, the higher overhead costs due in part to higher levels of rejected claims
All of this can and is very true for private insurance as well. Also private insurance has very high overhead costs for medical providers, i believe the number is somewhere between 30-40% of costs go into admin and billing for the various insurance providers?
average age of medicare patients
That is one of the rubs when looking at medicare/medicaid costs versus private insurers, the risk pool Medicare has to cover is wildly more expensive then
Re: (Score:2)
And Joe at Joe's Used Cars tells me that he's basically bankrupting himself by selling me that Yugo for only $15,000!
There's a whole lotta hollywood accounting going on.
Re: (Score:2)
So an employer couldn't offer a better health care plan to entice workers to come or stay working for them? You take the plan they state offers and if it doesn't cover your needs you are SOL? The VA provides a great example of how well that works in the long run (or Medicare where other patients subsidize medicare patients because Medicare doesn't pay enough to cover the costs of keeping the doors open)... As a side note, government caused employer provided healthcare in the first place, the government set price controls on employee salaries and employers started offering insurance to keep workers as they couldn't legally offer more pay.
A corporation shouldn't be allowed to offer anything more than money and schedule to entice employees come working for them. Anything more and the corporation has too much influence over person's life. Corporation is a liability shield so people can take risks without hurting their personal well-being. It should not be a social organization or an unelected governance. Corporations should come below farm animals in terms of rights and privileges in society.
Medicare not only pays enough to cover its own pa
Re: (Score:2)
As a business owner, if I want a worker to come flush my toilet for one dollar an hour, and someone actually shows up desperate and begging for the job .. whose fault is that?
I'll say this. If you actually gave someone DESPERATE to flush a toilet for one dollar, I've got a hunch that they're just going to rob you and not come back to work. I mean if we get to that particular point, it's less about you running a business and more about you ensuring that people don't rob you blind. You might do better with a gun that you hold yourself, than to trust someone into your business that's desperate. Just saying.
I get what you're trying to get at, but I really ought to point out a ma
Re: (Score:2)
You blame others for "creating a society where opportunities are so lacking" by being part of the problem yourself by offering lacking opportunities yourself?
Seems like you played yourself, and are a perfect example of why we need unions.
Re: (Score:3)
Wrong. I am offering an opportunity, whereas the people not hiring anyone aren't. If someone accepts a job offer, it is a failure of YOU to have not offered him a better job. Why is it up to me to give someone a job, when you aren't doing the same or better?
Re: (Score:2)
I you hire someone for $1 an hour, and its the state is subsidizing that person so they can do things extravagant things like eat and sleep then the state is effectively subsidizing you. The person would not be able to work without those. You are socializing your cost.
More pay for less work. (Score:1)
Considering half the employees I see at the Apple Store are standing around chit-chatting with each other, they already get paid enough to do a minimal amount of work.
Re: (Score:1)
Considering half the employees I see at the Apple Store are standing around chit-chatting with each other
Apple stores are so bizarre. It's like each employee has a specialized task assigned and presumably they get in trouble if they step out of line and perform a function that needs to be handled by a different employee. It seems like it would be more efficient if they just used all the employees to assist customers, rather than have the Mac and Apple Watch sales associates standing around staring off into space, because most customers are there to shop for iPhones and iPads.
It's also weird how they act like
Re: (Score:1)
I imagine it's all part of the "theater" that gets the type of repeat customers who are going to pay $1200 every year for a new phone, or plunk down $2000+ on that shiny Macbook. It's like those fancy fashion stores on Madison Ave you have to make an appointment for, they just bring that feeling down a few pegs to the local mall. Numbers are numbers, it works for them.
I remember when when Microsoft was bandwagoning to imitate that idea with their own stores, it did not work or "feel" the same as an Apple
Re: (Score:2)
You must have lived under a rock for a while. You can get an iPhone and a MacBook for way less than that.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure but highest end of an iPhone is $1600 and there are people out there (not many but i have met them) who will get the latest and greatest every generation because they have the money for it.
And you can easily spec a macbook over $2k. Easy peezy.
And for the people who aren't spending that the feeling of being in an Apple Store and being a bit doted on by the geniuses is all part of the selling and Apple is all about long term customers. Your first iPhone and Mac usually aren't your last.
Re: More pay for less work. (Score:2)
While they may or may not be on commission, I suspect they are on a quota for the shift/week/pay period/month/quarter/year.
Re: (Score:3)
They will not get more pay. They will get less
The authors find that unionized workers earn on average 11.2% more in wages than nonunionized peers (workers in the same industry and occupation with similar education and experience). Unionized Black workers are paid 13.7% more than their nonunionized peers, while unionized Hispanic workers are paid 20.1% more than their nonunionized peers. White workers represented by union are paid 8.7% more than their nonunionized peers. Additionally, 94% of workers covered by a union contract have access to employer-s [epi.org]
Re: (Score:2)
That quote specifies 'same industry, occupation with similar education and experience'. It says nothing about location and localized cost of living. Unionized shops tend to be in more liberal areas with much higher cost of living. Wages are thus higher to compensate for that localized labor market. It's very easy to manipulate statistics in your favor by choosing which factors to use and not use.
Re: More pay for less work. (Score:2)
How does that apply when it's in percentages and not absolute units?
Re: (Score:2)
You could have just said "I don't have contrary evidence, just my feelings"
Re: (Score:2)
Johnny makes $18. Johnny joins with his fellow workers in a union. They negotiate their wages up to $25 an hour with 10% going to the union. Johnny now takes home $22.50 an hour.
Facts are easy when you can just make em up! Wow it's like I'm having a discussion with Rothbard himself.
Keep arguing without evidence, it's going great.
Re: More pay for less work. (Score:2)
Exactly what leverage do the workers have to negotiate a higher wage? Their deep skill set? The trick to these negotiations is that nothing changes until the employer agrees, and I can't imagine Apple will just throw these workers a 40% increase because they want it.
Mark my words, there will be minor changes in certain store policies and wages will remain about the same, so the employees will see actual wages DROP after they pay their union dues.
Apple has no reason to agree to any meaningful wage increases,
Re: (Score:3)
Same leverage employees and labor have had since capitalism has been a thing, their actual labor. Apple can negotiate or can choose not to and fight it. If Apple can rehire at their current rate and retrain the entire store at an acceptable cost then the employees have little leverage yet. That's the game. I don't know enough about the internal machinations of an apple store to say what the odds of it working are.
The article states this store has 100 employees with 70% support in polling. If they form
Re: More pay for less work. (Score:2)
The article states this store has 100 employees with 70% support in polling. If they form and then strike then the onus is on Apple. Lose the revenue of that store and either fire, retrain and hire 100 new people or negotiate.
The Apple strategy is simple - we pay market rate, offer above market benefits, and we have no reason to raise wages.
When Apple rejects the unions proposals, they will go to some form of arbitration, where the union will be asked to put forth a compensation package and defend their numbers.
What can the employees claim? (Serious question)
- unique skill set? (Apple provides the training that gave them those skills)
- not paid a fair wage? (I doubt this is provable)
- cruel work environment? (Apple is Uber woke,
Re: More pay for less work. (Score:2)
Maybe? Truth is you or I don't know what will happen but the employees believe they can get more. We'll see. Obviously Apple isnt doing something right in the employees estimation if the union drive is accurate about 70/100 wanting to form.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com... [mediabiasfactcheck.com] other objective sources rate it similarly as a lef
Noice noice (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You know there's plenty of countries in the world that have more worker protection in the US that aren't full Communist.
I'm pretty sure Tuxguin would survive many days in Switzerland for example.
Obviously (Score:1, Offtopic)
In a statement, the union said Apple, like other tech employers, had effectively created a tiered work force that denied retail workers the pay, benefits and respect that workers earned at its corporate offices.
Obviously, because, as we all know, Apple HQ in Cupertino is little more than the world's largest Apple Retail Store, and all the employees are either salesmen, repair techs, Greeters, clerks or store managers - there are no "engineers" or "programmers" at Apple HQ and everyone at Apple HQ runs around in brightly colored Apple T Shirts, color-coded to indicate exactly which mindless cog they are in this juggernaut called "Apple" /SMH
We need unions... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I remember meetings with higher management with and without a union rep at the table. Just having the rep at the table changed the tone of the conversation. He probably could just watch netflix. He just had to be there.
This wasn't a nitpicking guy. If the request from management was reasonable, but not according to our contracts and there were no big objections, he kept his mouth shut. Well, he may have pushed to have the formal paperwork done for that request.
Management can be pretty manipula
I agree with the right to unionize. (Score:2)
I also agree with the right of employers to negotiate as hard as they can to their own benefit. In other words, if a union is put in place, the employer should feel empowered to drive towards compensation that on average is lower than they were paying before. Unionization is the "transactionalization" (is that word?) of the relationship. "What's right" is now removed from the question. "What's possible" is the goal for both sides, and neither side should feel embarrassed to embrace it.
It's hard to find issu