Apple workers in Atlanta drop union vote request, citing intimidation tactics

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 29
    tehabetehabe Posts: 70member
    JinTech said:
    tehabe said:
    In complaints filed last week with the National Labor Relations Board, the CWA accused Apple of violating federal labor law by forcing workers in Atlanta and New York City to attend “captive audience” meetings about unionization.
    Existing precedent allows companies to hold such meetings, but the labor board’s current general counsel, Jennifer Abruzzo, views them as inherently coercive and illegal. And she’s pursuing cases that could change the precedent.
    Forcing? I'm willing to bet that these mandatory (which is the verbiage I am sure Apple used) you were paid to be there. Companies are allowed to have mandatory meetings when they are discussing things of high importance. Generally, the only way out is if you are sick, have a family emergency, or have other work responsibilities, which I am sure were the guidelines here too.
    Does this make any difference about those meetings, I'm sure Apple made a good pro and con argument about unions. And in the end all voted in favour of Brexit.
  • Reply 22 of 29
    All this anti-union nonsense from Apple is really sickening. As a share holder I would gladly give up my dividends if it meant Apple was ethically taking care of their workers. Unfortunately Tim would rather pal around with the sociopaths ruining the world in Davos than take care of his workers. 

    I’m normally not one to harp on how much I liked Jobs over Cook. But Steve would have found a way to connect with the workers and make them feel heard instead of paying millions to a shady law firm to commit crimes and union bust. 

    Apple’s unethical behaviour here isn’t even in line with the standards they set for suppliers. And that’s the thing that really bothers Me. 
    How do you know Apples behaviour was unethical?  If Apple prefers dealing with their staff individually with good pay and HR practices, why can’t the advocate for that. And it would be prudent to hire a law firm with experience in this field. In the eyes of a union, any such law firm would be labeled union-busting.  Even if those law firms have painted outside the lines with other clients, it doesn’t mean Apple directed them to do so. What’s missing in all of this is evidence of unethical behaviour.  

    I’ve worked as a unionized employee, in a non unionized organization, and now a manager in a union setting. There are pros and cons to both models. 
    snApple_InsiderRudeBoyRudy
  • Reply 23 of 29
    tehabetehabe Posts: 70member
    All this anti-union nonsense from Apple is really sickening. As a share holder I would gladly give up my dividends if it meant Apple was ethically taking care of their workers. Unfortunately Tim would rather pal around with the sociopaths ruining the world in Davos than take care of his workers. 

    I’m normally not one to harp on how much I liked Jobs over Cook. But Steve would have found a way to connect with the workers and make them feel heard instead of paying millions to a shady law firm to commit crimes and union bust. 

    Apple’s unethical behaviour here isn’t even in line with the standards they set for suppliers. And that’s the thing that really bothers Me. 
    How do you know Apples behaviour was unethical?  If Apple prefers dealing with their staff individually with good pay and HR practices, why can’t the advocate for that. And it would be prudent to hire a law firm with experience in this field. In the eyes of a union, any such law firm would be labeled union-busting.  Even if those law firms have painted outside the lines with other clients, it doesn’t mean Apple directed them to do so. What’s missing in all of this is evidence of unethical behaviour.  

    I’ve worked as a unionized employee, in a non unionized organization, and now a manager in a union setting. There are pros and cons to both models. 
    You should have also read the linked Bloomberg post, Apple Insider is not really going into depth of the issue. When a company hires a law firm to keep an union out of the company it is union busting by definition. The thing is, should an employer be able to make those arguments w/o the union being able to make their arguments in a similar setting? If it comes to a union vote, the voters need complete information from both sides to make an informed and fair decision.
    Xedmichelb76ronn
  • Reply 24 of 29
    Having been a spectator of union decision votes, and belonging to a union at one point, here are some of my opinions:
    • When there isn't enough support, the organizers will withdraw, or delay the vote to gin up more support.  This is a tactic so there isn't a loss.
    • Both sides stress the benefits of their side while downplaying the risks
    • Companies usually don't want to recognize a union because it impedes their ability to enact rules without negotiating with the Union and having a vote on the matter.  That includes changes that help the workers:
    • In the above point, let's say that the contract states that the workers have a 5% wage pool for raises each year on a 5 year contract.  Inflation is 14% for years 2 and 3, and 2% for years 1, 4, and 5.  If there is no negotiation and vote by the members, the workers are only allowed that 5% wage raise pool.  It's a contract, folks, for better or worse.  So, instead of getting 37%, which is what the inflation did, they only get 27.6% increases.
    • Most, if not all, contracts have "no strike" clauses, where if the workers aren't happy, they can't strike.  The strikes occur when there is no contract, and they want to let the company know that they're not happy with negotiations.
    • Other somewhat interesting things:  (I wish I could indent the bullets)
    • Most contracts have no picket line crossing clauses, where if another union is striking, the workers of the union do not have to cross the lines.  If Apple were striking, the workers of UPS could not deliver packages if the UPS contract had that clause.
    • If there is a contract in a right to work state, the workers don't have to join the union, even if there is a "must belong" clause (as is the case is a lot of non-right to work states)
    • If there is a "must join the union" clause, a worker can be a Beck Objector, who only pays the cost of the contract, not the Union dues.  They don't get a vote, but get the benefits (or detriment) of the contract.  The Union has to send an accounting of all contract costs to the Beck Objectors. 
    • Like all organizations, both Union and Corporate, people with power tend to grow comfortable with the power they have, and need to be flushed every 2-3 years, for both the workers and the owners of the company's sake
    While this conservative (me) isn't necessarily pro-Union (the one I was part of negotiated an excellent health coverage contract), I'm not anti-Union, either.  My steward's car looked like it was pulled from the ocean and was covered with everything from "end capitalism" to "Bernie" stickers, and when he told us all to wear red when the president of China visited our plant, I told the Union that I wanted to be a Beck Objector.  I know it was just one guy, but the Union contacts I talked to supported him, so I did what I could.  Again, the contract was good, just that guy (who was a steward for 15 years, always unopposed) rubbed me the wrong way.
    edited May 2022
  • Reply 25 of 29
    MadbumMadbum Posts: 536member
    Xed said:
    Madbum said:
    More likely cancelled because these union commies wanted to “sneak” union vote in without members having all the information .

    a dirty bunch 
    Ah, yes, that ol' communism tentpole of lettering citizens freely vote to better obtain a living wage. 🙄
    Unions are an extension of socialist societies. It has its place on some industries but definitely not Apple retails stores where workers are already getting much more than other retail workers . 

    When you are ignorant, read more before speaking 
  • Reply 26 of 29
    MadbumMadbum Posts: 536member
    spice-boy said:
    Madbum said:
    More likely cancelled because these union commies wanted to “sneak” union vote in without members having all the information .

    a dirty bunch 
    Dear grandpa, "commies" are a thing of the past. Our newly minted Billionaires have flourished not only here but in former communists nations (Russia, China). I don't understand why you don't think your fellow Americans deserve living wage especially after trying explain to you how your mouse works each time you visit your local Apple Store. Wanting your neighbors to have less than you is a classic trait found in communist societies. Come to think of it, you would fit in perfectly in the Soviet Union if it had survived the capitalist junta. 
    Simple, they can go work for Burger King if they think showing people how to use Apple products that every 10 year old in this country can do is some incredible feat 

    Communist doctrine is every people and neighbor are equal regardless of your individual hard work, sounds like a union…
    edited May 2022
  • Reply 27 of 29
    XedXed Posts: 2,701member
    Madbum said:
    Xed said:
    Madbum said:
    More likely cancelled because these union commies wanted to “sneak” union vote in without members having all the information .

    a dirty bunch 
    Ah, yes, that ol' communism tentpole of lettering citizens freely vote to better obtain a living wage. 🙄
    Unions are an extension of socialist societies. It has its place on some industries but definitely not Apple retails stores where workers are already getting much more than other retail workers . 

    When you are ignorant, read more before speaking 
    You shouldn't be calling others ignorant when you intermix socialism and communism as being one and the same, and don't have a clue about what is legal and fair in a democratic, capitalist society.
    ronnmuthuk_vanalingambaconstang
  • Reply 28 of 29
    ... Workers and management can work collegially as a team for the betterment of the company...
    Yes... and it doesn't require a union to do that.  I am working under a union contract for over 30 years now... i am NOT ALLOWED to "work with the company" other than as outlined in the contract.  The union restricts my ability to "help out" or "go the extra mile" even if i wanted to.

    Look up "extortion" and then explain to me how the modern union doesn't fit under that umbrella.  I either pay union dues against my will, or they WILL have me fired from the company. (...with government approval to boot!)
  • Reply 29 of 29
    ronnronn Posts: 669member
    The Towson, Maryland store beat Atlanta to become the 1st unionized Apple store

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/maryland-apple-store-workers-vote-unionize-first-company-us-rcna34278

    The final tally was 65-33, according to CNBC. The store, located outside Baltimore, is the first Apple location in the U.S. to unionize.


Sign In or Register to comment.