757
Amazon Says It Doesn't 'Employ' Drivers, But Records Show It Hired Firms to Prevent Them From Unionizing (www.vice.com)
submitted 3 years ago by [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world
58 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Amazon Says It Doesn't 'Employ' Drivers, But Records Show It Hired Firms to Prevent Them From Unionizing::Amazon spent $14.2 million total on anti-union consulting in 2022, filings with the Department of Labor show.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 3 years ago (6 children)

If you're in an environment that would retaliate against you for unionizing, you're not "well taken care of".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (5 children)

    Do you really know though? The point is, if you’re well compensated, have good work-life balance, treated well, have good people around and above you, the thought of unionizing isn’t likely to be that important to you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (4 children)

    Yeah I do, just on the principle that an environment that retaliates against worker solidarity is an oppressive environment.

    It's similar to someone saying "can slaves be well taken care of by their owners?" Many people would say yes, but I would say no on principle. No matter how short the work day, no matter the benefits, months off every year, etc. I would say on principle that being owned means you're not well taken care of.

    The principle here being that sometimes "one" negative can be enough to mean you're not "well-taken care of".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (3 children)

    That’s not an appropriate comparison.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (2 children)

    There's a subset of people that anytime a comparison is made, where one situation is worse than the other, something happens where they become unable to understand the concept of a principle.

    It's like you recognize "hey, chattel slavery is worse than wage slavery!" (which is correct), and therefore there can be no principle applicable to both situations (incorrect).

    I assume it's that you're offended by the comparison, and the emotion gets the better of you, disallowing you from thinking clearly about it. I don't know what else it would be.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •