Maryland Apple Store staff vote in favor of strike action
Workers at the Apple Towson Town Center store in Maryland have backed their union's plan to hold a strike over unresolved issues.
Apple Towson Town Center store (Source: Apple)
The Towson store unionized in 2022, and representatives had said they were disheartened by what were described as Apple's insufficient responses to concerns. Unions at the store conducted an independent survey early in 2024 and reported on alleged illegal anti-union activities by Apple.
Now according to CNBC, the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (AIM) union says workers at the store have voted in favor of authorizing a strike. "The issues at the forefront of this action include concerns over work-life balance," said the union in a statement, "unpredictable scheduling practices disrupting personal lives, and wages failing to align with the area's cost of living."
The vote was to give the union the mandate to strike, rather than over specifics such as dates. With that mandate, the union will now determine a date for work stoppage, unless Apple's response means a strike is no longer considered necessary.
"We will engage with the union representing our team in Towson respectfully and in good faith," said an Apple spokeswoman.
Previously, Apple has been vehemently against the practice of unionizing in its stores. Apple retail chief Deirdre O'Brien has said that putting "another organization in the middle of our relationship [with retal staff] could fundamentally change the company's "open and collaborative and direct engagement."
However, retail staff have questioned that description of the relationship between Apple and its workers. One staff member summarized the working conditions by saying that complaining to Apple is "like writing a letter to Santa."
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
As far as retail is concerned, probably the best job going and they get 40% discounts, so can make money on the side, by buying and selling stuff!
100 years ago, even 50 years ago, workers generally were poorly paid and treated, now with all the laws, Unions just scam workers 😡
It's a shame Apple enforcers can't take 'em out and beat 'em like union busters used to do. It's Apple's store and they can treat employees however they wish. Don't like it? Quit and work someplace else. /s
I love the products but there is a toxic attitude here that needs to be challenged, and it obviously affects more than just customers. It’s ashame this is just one store, which will make it fairly easy for Apple to ignore.
I was unfortunately fired from Apple retail a few years ago. The reason given for my termination was that I "may have violated policy" by refusing to sign documents that would provide Apple with my medical records. I believe that I had a right to privacy and that I should not have been forced to disclose my medical information to my employer.
I'm glad to see that Apple workers are now unionized and have more power to protect their rights. I hope that my experience can help to raise awareness about the importance of worker protections.
It sounds like Apple is living up to their side of the deal and funneling all of their negotiations through the union representatives. They are holding up their end of the deal.
At the same time those who have "hired" the Union to represent their own best interests are voicing their grievances to the public and at Apple directly, i.e., the "letter to Santa" analogy. Apple isn't Santa, and more so, Apple is no longer authorized to respond directly to union members. Waiting for a response directly from Apple is an exercise in futility. What I would ask if I were a represented employee is "what is the union really doing for me?" If you're paying Union dues and the Union isn't delivering the goods for you, maybe I should be looking for someone else who can deliver real results. Those who join a Union are relinquishing their ability to directly hold Apple accountable. The accountability shifts to the Union. The Unions made a promise to their members and they are obligated to follow through on their promise. Hold them accountable and fire them if they fail to perform. They must do a lot more than simply agitate.
I do understand the notion that collective bargaining gives those in the collective more clout than any single individual would have, at least in theory. But if that theory isn't translating into a bottom line reality, maybe those involved need to consider taking another approach, like finding better representation or regaining personal responsibility. Apple has an immense ability to absorb any losses associated with workers walking out, or even closing stores. If nobody shows up to work, they can afford to close those stores, temporarily or permanently. Everyone has to consider their own odds of staying gainfully employed going forward with some consideration for probable outcomes they are aware of. The only job security you really ever have as an employee is your ability to get another job. You have to invest in yourself continuously even when there are no guarantees. If you join a Union with an expectation that you can simply coast along or no longer invest in yourself because the Union is your safety net, all I can say is that I wish you all the best.
"Workers at the Apple Towson Town Center store in Maryland have backed their union's plan to hold a strike over unresolved issues.
The employees are holding up their end of the bargain too, and supporting their union negotiators.
Apple won't have an issue replacing someone at corporate either.
In US we see Apple playing the workers as described by Steinbeck. Is that OK?
Apple gave us FineWoven to avoid using skins from dead animals.
Surely Apple can protect the purchasing power of those US employees they pay the least.
Current status: Apple will rather save the skin of a dead cow than protect their US employees. To me this is not OK.
Employees also have the opportunity to purchase Apple stock at a small discount; I am unaware of any resale caveats there.
Labour laws differ between countries but I'm pretty sure that firing a unionised employee for going on strike is illegal no matter where you are. So is bringing in replacement workers, except in clearly defined situations that form part of the agreement between the union and the employer.
Apple is powerful enough and has the money to pay the penalty for any illegal activity it might engage in relating to its employees, and the company has certainly been found guilty of illegal behaviour in the past (e.g. Steve Jobs' wage-fixing and anti-poaching agreements with other tech giants back in the day), so I think the collective strength of a union is a justifiable consideration for all employees of the company.
But the company also goes to great lengths to treat employees well. Nobody in retail was laid off during COVID despite the stores being closed, there is ongoing training and, yes, the employee discounts. In return it wants maximum effort and maximum obedience from its workforce.
This is going to be a long and protracted fight and we may never know the full truth. But I'm willing to bet that both sides are asking for more than is reasonable and that the courts are going to get involved.
Anybody is free to join and support a trade union, regardless, and setting up a shop council for individual stores or companies is a legal right (though companies do occasionally try to thwart attempts at forming one, they rarely succeed). It is illegal to punish or fire employees for trying.
My wife needs expensive medical supplies but the insurance company wanted all kinds of health details before providing them. We provided them with the doctor's official recommendation with the reasoning as to why she needed the equipment but the company wanted more.
The doctor refused point blank, arguing that all the contract with them required was a qualified specialist prescription. He said that patient health specifics were between him and the patient. No one else.
He then wrote a footnote, in capital letters to the original prescription, reminding the insurance company of the contract terms and telling them (in no uncertain terms) to provide the equipment.
I only wish I had a photo of the face of the guy I handed it too. All he could say was "well, that's not very professional. I'll have to escalate this".
A few hours later, we got a call saying everything had been approved.
I think your case and reasoning would have been upheld here in the EU.
We will never understand why some jobs in the US are paid so poorly that tipping is the only way those workers can make ends meet.
This kind of language is utterly meaningless:
"another organization in the middle of our relationship [with retal staff] could fundamentally change the company's "open and collaborative and direct engagement."
And? So? Why not have open and collaborative engagement with the employee 'representatives'? The unions.
Thanks for sharing your story, Avon B7. It sounds like you and your wife had a frustrating experience with your insurance company, but good on your doctor for taking a strong stance on patient privacy. That doctor sounds like a keeper!
Your situation definitely highlights the importance of having clear boundaries around medical information. It's great to see people like your doctor and the newly formed Apple unions fighting for these rights.
Apple's reason for firing me always felt flimsy. There should be a clear line between what an employer needs to know and an employee's private health information. Hopefully, things will change for the better with the union around.
And completely agree with your point about meaningless jargon. "Open and collaborative engagement" sounds good on paper, but it loses all meaning if it doesn't translate to respecting employees' rights and their representatives.