Apple illegally denied benefits to union workers, says US labor board

AppleInsiderAppleInsider
Posted:
in General Discussion

The National Labor Relations Board claims that Apple has violated labor laws by refusing to give union workers the same benefits as other staff.

Apple Towson Town Center, Maryland
Apple Towson Town Center, Maryland



This new accusation follows a June 2023 ruling by the board concluded that Apple's anti-union practices at its World Trade Center store were illegal. The new complaint specifically concerns the Towson store in Maryland, where union staff say Apple has been "fighting us at every step."

According to Bloomberg, a regional director of the National Labor Relations Board filed a complaint on November 21, 2023. The filing claims that Apple announced a series of new benefits for staff at Towson in October 2022, but then refused to provide the package for unionized workers.

Following that alleged exclusion, the International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers (IAM), filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board. IAMAW accuses Apple of using the new benefits to discourage staff from joining a union.

Apple has not commented.

The Towson, Maryland store was the first to have its union status officially recognized by Apple. In January 2023, the IAM began negotiating with the company over pay and conditions.

Read on AppleInsider

FileMakerFeller
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 24
    pjt1pjt1 Posts: 2member
    Total Bullshit. Apple employees have the best pay/benefit plan in the industry. These idiots haven't a clue and are damaging the employment of their coworkers. They need to quit and go work at Starbucks or their nearest supermarket. They'd be better off bagging groceries.
    iOS_Guy80macxpressjfabula1watto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 24
    beowulfschmidtbeowulfschmidt Posts: 2,375member
    Did the union workers have a contract for the benefits they received?  If so, how can it be illegal for Apple to meet the terms of that contract?  Or did the contract include a provision that says "we get any benefits anyone else does" as well?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 24
    wchumpssonwchumpsson Posts: 1member
    pjt1 said:
    Total Bullshit. Apple employees have the best pay/benefit plan in the industry. These idiots haven't a clue and are damaging the employment of their coworkers. They need to quit and go work at Starbucks or their nearest supermarket. They'd be better off bagging groceries.
    Total moron. Try working for them before you make a comment. Better yet try getting a job that isn't for working for your parents.
    muthuk_vanalingamXedddawson100darkvaderronngrandact73chasmbyronlhammeroftruth
  • Reply 4 of 24
    PancakePancake Posts: 45member
    If negotiations are ongoing for a collective bargaining agreement any current benefits are status quo and won’t change. Any new benefits must be negotiated for via the CBA. Apple did nothing wrong here. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 24
    GerfnitAuthorGerfnitAuthor Posts: 16member
    I thought the purpose of a union contract was to lock in benefits with an employer so the employer couldn't make arbitrary changes. If you're a union employee, the contract says what you get. Isn't it disingenuous for a union employee whose benefits are defined and secured to say, "Wait a second. I also want what non-employees are getting"? Shouldn't those be negotiated? [Note: I've worked in the vicinity of union employees but have never been a union employee. My lesson from that experience was never to do any part of the union employee's job or suffer a grievance – even if they're not doing it.]
    FileMakerFellerwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 24
    clexmanclexman Posts: 218member
    I'd like to have my cake and eat it too.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 24
    godofbiscuitssfgodofbiscuitssf Posts: 128member
    pjt1 said:
    Total Bullshit. Apple employees have the best pay/benefit plan in the industry. These idiots haven't a clue and are damaging the employment of their coworkers. They need to quit and go work at Starbucks or their nearest supermarket. They'd be better off bagging groceries.

    You're missing the point completely, aren't you?
    muthuk_vanalingamdarkvaderronnanome
  • Reply 8 of 24
    godofbiscuitssfgodofbiscuitssf Posts: 128member

    clexman said:
    I'd like to have my cake and eat it too.
    What are you talking about?  Labor laws exist for everyone.
    muthuk_vanalingamdarkvaderronnFileMakerFelleranome
  • Reply 9 of 24
    godofbiscuitssfgodofbiscuitssf Posts: 128member

    beowulfschmidt said:
    Did the union workers have a contract for the benefits they received?  If so, how can it be illegal for Apple to meet the terms of that contract?  Or did the contract include a provision that says "we get any benefits anyone else does" as well?

    It wasn't about meeting terms of a contract, it was about the fact that Apple engaged in union-busting by refusing to even make the benefits a possibility.
    darkvaderronnFileMakerFeller
  • Reply 10 of 24
    ddawson100ddawson100 Posts: 539member
    pjt1 said:
    Total Bullshit. Apple employees have the best pay/benefit plan in the industry. These idiots haven't a clue and are damaging the employment of their coworkers. They need to quit and go work at Starbucks or their nearest supermarket. They'd be better off bagging groceries.
    You seem to be trying to make a strong argument but maybe bolster it with some facts about benefits or the law. Thanks.
    muthuk_vanalingamronngrandact73watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 24
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,677member
    Lost in all of this is that Apple is sitting on about $170 Billion in declared cash (there may be more undeclared in the care of their Jersey subsidiary which answers to no country). They can't rid themselves of it fast enough, adding more to the pot every day, and having nothing to spend it on. For all intents, it's serving no purpose other than hoarding, even though Apple says it intends to be cash-neutral. Someday. In a faraway time... and seem to have no idea how to get there.

    But they'll fight tooth and nail against sharing even 1% percent of the billions in languishing cash with the least paid of their employees who represent the public face of Apple. And no, Apple is not the only stupidly wealthy hoarder, but this article isn't about the others. It just seems so ignorantly short-sighted and selfish.
    edited November 2023 muthuk_vanalingamdarkvaderronnFileMakerFelleranomeHonkershammeroftruth
  • Reply 12 of 24
    beowulfschmidtbeowulfschmidt Posts: 2,375member
    godofbiscuitssf said:

    beowulfschmidt said:
    Did the union workers have a contract for the benefits they received?  If so, how can it be illegal for Apple to meet the terms of that contract?  Or did the contract include a provision that says "we get any benefits anyone else does" as well?

    It wasn't about meeting terms of a contract, it was about the fact that Apple engaged in union-busting by refusing to even make the benefits a possibility.

    OK, so what?  Sure, it's a dick move, but what makes it illegal?  If the existing contract doesn't include those benefits, why is it illegal for Apple to decline to provide them to contracted workers?  Calling it "union busting" doesn't automatically make it so.  What law was actually broken here?
    FileMakerFellerwatto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 24
    riverkoriverko Posts: 248member
    It is really interesting to see how it works in the US. E.g. here in CZ, if there are unions in the company, they negotiate benefits etc for all employees, no matter if they are members or not… so those who are not members are actually benefiting from this…
    gatorguyFileMakerFellerwatto_cobrakurai_kagehammeroftruth
  • Reply 14 of 24
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,677member

    Did the union workers have a contract for the benefits they received?  If so, how can it be illegal for Apple to meet the terms of that contract?  Or did the contract include a provision that says "we get any benefits anyone else does" as well?

    It wasn't about meeting terms of a contract, it was about the fact that Apple engaged in union-busting by refusing to even make the benefits a possibility.

    OK, so what?  Sure, it's a dick move, but what makes it illegal?  If the existing contract doesn't include those benefits, why is it illegal for Apple to decline to provide them to contracted workers?  Calling it "union busting" doesn't automatically make it so.  What law was actually broken here?
    If you and others read the NLRB's report before staking positions, you'd better understand what Apple is doing that purportedly violates rules and regulations. It's not because "someone said it was union-busting".

    Researching helps prevent phantom arguments. 
     https://www.goiam.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/COMPLAINT-Nov-21-2363.docx
    edited November 2023 muthuk_vanalingamdarkvaderronnFileMakerFellerchasm
  • Reply 15 of 24
    darkvaderdarkvader Posts: 1,146member
    GerfnitAuthor said:
    I thought the purpose of a union contract was to lock in benefits with an employer so the employer couldn't make arbitrary changes. If you're a union employee, the contract says what you get. Isn't it disingenuous for a union employee whose benefits are defined and secured to say, "Wait a second. I also want what non-employees are getting"? Shouldn't those be negotiated? [Note: I've worked in the vicinity of union employees but have never been a union employee. My lesson from that experience was never to do any part of the union employee's job or suffer a grievance – even if they're not doing it.]
    I see the problem here.  You seem to be under the impression that the Apple employees in question are operating under a union contract.

    They are not.

    No contract has been negotiated yet.  Apple isn't negotiating in good faith, and in the absence of a contract it is illegal for Apple to treat the union employees less well than any other employees.

    Apple is breaking the law.
    OferronnFileMakerFellerkurai_kage
  • Reply 16 of 24
    1348513485 Posts: 383member
    gatorguy said:
    ..... It just seems so ignorantly short-sighted and selfish.
    I admit to not following the situation closely, but I agree with you. This is where there has to be *someone* in management who has a clear enough big picture view to make all these avoidable self-inflicted injuries go away instead of festering. Do they like having some middle managers generating all the bad press and getting them into legal trouble to save what amounts to pocket change?

    If it was me, I'd tell them to stop this shit right now, and if it happens again you're gone. There are better things for a corporation to spend time, attention and money on than nickel-and-diming the lowest tier of employees.

    Tim, you actually have responsibilities beyond a quarterly financial report. Get back to your desk from your PR tour and make this go away. 
    FileMakerFellerronn
  • Reply 17 of 24
    jfabula1jfabula1 Posts: 178member
    godofbiscuitssf said:

    beowulfschmidt said:
    Did the union workers have a contract for the benefits they received?  If so, how can it be illegal for Apple to meet the terms of that contract?  Or did the contract include a provision that says "we get any benefits anyone else does" as well?

    It wasn't about meeting terms of a contract, it was about the fact that Apple engaged in union-busting by refusing to even make the benefits a possibility.
    Darn, quit  the union if it’s not benefiting you. Waaaa waaaa waaaa. Lucky you have a good paying job. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 24
    chasmchasm Posts: 3,654member
    Pancake said:
    If negotiations are ongoing for a collective bargaining agreement any current benefits are status quo and won’t change. Any new benefits must be negotiated for via the CBA. Apple did nothing wrong here. 
    You’ll forgive me if I believe the opinion of the **National Labor Relations Board**, a governmental body charged with enforcing labour laws, over your uninformed and ignorant opinion.
    ronnkurai_kage
  • Reply 19 of 24
    davidwdavidw Posts: 2,124member
    gatorguy said:
    Lost in all of this is that Apple is sitting on about $170 Billion in declared cash (there may be more undeclared in the care of their Jersey subsidiary which answers to no country). They can't rid themselves of it fast enough, adding more to the pot every day, and having nothing to spend it on. For all intents, it's serving no purpose other than hoarding, even though Apple says it intends to be cash-neutral. Someday. In a faraway time... and seem to have no idea how to get there.

    But they'll fight tooth and nail against sharing even 1% percent of the billions in languishing cash with the least paid of their employees who represent the public face of Apple. And no, Apple is not the only stupidly wealthy hoarder, but this article isn't about the others. It just seems so ignorantly short-sighted and selfish.

    That makes zero business sense. Apple is not a non-profit  charity organization. The whole point of Apple (or any retail businesses) of opening and operating a retail stores is the hope of getting a descent ROI, from each of the stores they operate. It makes zero business sense to use profits from other ventures, when negotiating a union contract for one store. What profits that should be looked at when negotiating a union contract for a retail store, is the performance and profits made from that store. Why should any business that might be operating a money losing store or a store not living up to its expected ROI, have to support it with profits made overseas or from more profitable stores, when negotiating a union contract. Or even when concerning the pay and benefits of non union workers, of one store. (So long as their wages are in line with FLSA and State laws.)  Labor is a major cost in operating any retail store, can mean the difference of whether that store is profitable or not and that cost should not be ignored when negotiating any union contract for that store, regardless of how much cash the company is sitting on elsewhere. I know union people don't like to think that way. They think their union members deserves a big piece of all the companies profits, no matter how little their union members might have contributed to it.   

    No way can the union demand Apple give their Apple retail stores unionized employees like a 25% raise, just because they (Apple) are sitting on $170B cash and can afford to. (And it's of no surprise that you see Apple as being selfish for not giving up just 1% of it, to meet all of the union pay demands.) Or maybe that because Apple is spending $50B a year to buy back their stocks, they should use money that belongs to its shareholders, to give their retail employees at least a 25% raise.

    No way should Apple not contest any of the union demands, just because they can easily afford to pay for those demands from cash sitting overseas. This is not a case of where Apple Store employees are paid less and have less benefits, than other retail jobs and are being exploited. By most accounts, Apple retail employees are being paid above the US average for retail employees, with better benefits and with an Apple Genius being one of the highest paid in retail. This is far from a case of a staving Oliver Twist ..... asking for more. Which the union wants people to think.

    You think Apple is the one being selfish with this demand? After all, paying Apple NY Grand Central retail store employees demand of a minimum wage of $30 an hour, wouldn't even amount to the interest Apple makes on the $170B cash on hand.


    If Apple is going to give away their cash position sitting overseas, instead of returning it to their shareholders (like they been doing), then they should find a way to offer it to the Foxconn employees building Apple products in China. They deserve it more than the union employees (or those that wants to unionize) working in Apple retail stores.



  • Reply 20 of 24
    davidwdavidw Posts: 2,124member
    chasm said:
    Pancake said:
    If negotiations are ongoing for a collective bargaining agreement any current benefits are status quo and won’t change. Any new benefits must be negotiated for via the CBA. Apple did nothing wrong here. 
    You’ll forgive me if I believe the opinion of the **National Labor Relations Board**, a governmental body charged with enforcing labour laws, over your uninformed and ignorant opinion.

    And like all government elected bodies, the NLRB is not without bias. Their rulings are not final, not always correct and still can be appealed to the Federal courts (including the SCOTUS) by both parties involve. 



    >After evaluating the evidence, the judges issue initial decisions. ALJ decisions are subject to review by the Board in Washington D.C., composed of five Members nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Any or all parties can appeal by filing exceptions.<


    When Trump was in his last year of his Presidency, would you still swear by the NLRB decisions, knowing that he got to nominate 4 of the 5 members of the NLRB?  With POTUS Biden at the end of his 3rd year, he got to nominate 3 of the 5 members and a 4th come this January.



    And besides








    edited November 2023
Sign In or Register to comment.