Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Amazon Workers Vote To Unionise

About time Amazon workers had a union, they are a significant constituency and deserve a voice.
 
Interesting that a self-organised effort has been able to succeed where the established unions haven't - from that article:
But the win by a little-known, independent union with few ties to existing groups appears to raise as many questions for the labor movement as it answers: not least, whether there is something fundamentally broken with the traditional bureaucratic union model that can only be solved by replacing it with new worker-led organizations.
The Staten Island outcome came on the heels of what is trending toward a narrow loss by the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union at a large Amazon warehouse in Alabama in a campaign. The vote is close enough that the results will not be known for several weeks as contested ballots are litigated.
 
Labour Notes article here, with interviews with the workers and a brief bit from one of the organising committee:
 
Interesting that a self-organised effort has been able to succeed where the established unions haven't - from that article:

The union busting tactics in Alabama were pretty intense, but the RWDSU arguably weren't aggressive enough in responding.

 
The union busting tactics in Alabama were pretty intense, but the RWDSU arguably weren't aggressive enough in responding.

Have you been following the Amazonians United stuff at all? That's really interesting, it feels like workers there are actually doing the stuff that anarchosyndicalist/council communist types always suggest they should do but don't really expect to actually happen. Anyway, there's definitely a tradeoff between having a high-profile campaign that gets media support vs staying low-profile for as long as possible and just trying to talk to workers without alerting the bosses, and in retrospect it looks like RWDSU called that one wrong.
This was a really good interview, imo (and conducted before the Bessemer vote, so not a case of hindsight being perfect):
As far as the union election in Alabama, I’m in complete solidarity with our coworkers there, but the union, RWDSU, fucked up from the beginning. It’s a shame that RWDSU is running a campaign whose only outcome can be failure. We all should be more critical of these attempts to “unionize workers.”


Let me try to be more clear. I see that RWDSU staffers and members have been effective at collecting union authorization cards, but a union built out of paper won’t stand. My coworkers in Alabama, as far as I can tell, don’t have a strong organizing committee that is taking on fights within the workplace. RWDSU organizers could be guiding them in how to organize themselves, but they’re not. So I don’t blame the workers, I blame the union staffers for misguiding workers. I’ve heard a few Alabama workers talk about issues within the workplace, but I haven’t heard of them figuring out how to address them directly by taking some sort of collective action. Workers in Alabama were angry about issues, so they decided to reach out to a union for help, and the union told them, “All right. The solution to these issues is that you have to form a union, and the way to do it is through a union election.” So the union staffers started their collection of union authorization cards. They got a lot of cards signed, went through some legal maneuvers and then got the union election with an expanded bargaining unit. They initially filed for a bargaining unit of like 1,500, now it’s a bargaining unit of 5,800.


And now what they’re doing is basically just mobilizing a yes vote, calling or texting workers, “Hey how’s it going, vote yes for the union!” But where is the fighting organization of workers? All I’ve seen is solidarity rallies of non-Amazon workers and a lot of media coverage painting Amazon workers as helpless victims of Amazon’s anti-union campaign.


If workers don’t have solid fighting organizations within the workplace, Amazon’s anti-union campaign is going to be very effective because they don’t have a way of combating it. The solidarity rallies and media coverage are nice, but most workers don’t see them or care about them, and they don’t do much for workers in captive-audience meetings where they’re being convinced that a union would be bad for them. Outside rallies and endless articles on how this is a historic and monumental election simply don’t weigh heavily on how workers make their decisions on whether to vote yes or no for a union. The vast majority of workers make decisions based on what they see and hear directly from people they trust, and based on their assessment of how this is going to directly impact their lives.


If workers, day-in and day-out, are seeing all this anti-union messaging at work and they’re not seeing a strong campaign against it from within, if workers aren’t fighting against it, mocking it, laughing at it, RWDSU is going to lose that vote. But let’s suppose that RWDSU is able to win the election. How will they get Amazon to agree to a collective bargaining agreement? How is a union going to have any sort of negotiating power with Amazon by only having one fulfillment center organized? Amazon has hundreds of facilities in the United States. They built redundancy into their logistics network to be able to handle disruptions, so why would Amazon agree to a contract without being forced into it?
Other Bessemer analysis:

 
Have you been following the Amazonians United stuff at all? That's really interesting, it feels like workers there are actually doing the stuff that anarchosyndicalist/council communist types always suggest they should do but don't really expect to actually happen. Anyway, there's definitely a tradeoff between having a high-profile campaign that gets media support vs staying low-profile for as long as possible and just trying to talk to workers without alerting the bosses, and in retrospect it looks like RWDSU called that one wrong.
This was a really good interview, imo (and conducted before the Bessemer vote, so not a case of hindsight being perfect):

Other Bessemer analysis:


good links, you and everyone.

re: SI. this is of course the right result. i'll be keeping my ears open for one specific angle, the degree to which ny'ers who read the post and kinda like trump will still support this action. it's a union town here, but a right-wing union town (PBA, e.g.). there is a small but loud claque of internet tough guys who are still screaming about how ocasio "destroyed" all the jobs that bezos was going to create in queens. but it wasn't ocasio, it was state senator michael gianaris who was the most important figure who blocked what would have been the hugest fucking giveaway of public resources to a private concern (including taking land to provide bezos with a personal helipad). but y'know, any stick to beat the bugbear, soros, ocasio, whomever.

it's not them i'm concerned with. well i am, but fuck 'em. unfortunately alot of people identify vertically, not horizontally.
 
Have you been following the Amazonians United stuff at all? That's really interesting, it feels like workers there are actually doing the stuff that anarchosyndicalist/council communist types always suggest they should do but don't really expect to actually happen. Anyway, there's definitely a tradeoff between having a high-profile campaign that gets media support vs staying low-profile for as long as possible and just trying to talk to workers without alerting the bosses, and in retrospect it looks like RWDSU called that one wrong.
This was a really good interview, imo (and conducted before the Bessemer vote, so not a case of hindsight being perfect):

Other Bessemer analysis:


That's really interesting. I haven't followed closely but spoken with people who have who have said generally the thrust has been too focused on handing out fliers and saying vote yes, just as you say. It's a good point about profile - media might help a little but you're also flagging to Amazon that they need to retaliate.
 
This is interesting on that actually - in response to the success at Staten Island, the new Teamsters President has announced that the Teamsters are going to organise Amazon.

Happy to be corrected but I'm not aware that the Teamsters have done any organising in any Amazon workplace anywhere.

 
This was a really good interview, imo (and conducted before the Bessemer vote, so not a case of hindsight being perfect):

Just to go back to this as well, its significant that here they're talking about not just how to take collective action but also on demands - one of the criticisms of the RWDSU that I've seen a lot is there wasn't enough focus on what a union would demand or how it would win its demands.

That's a real problem when you have these captive audience meetings where the company can give all their 'reasons why unions are bad' bullshit but workers don't have an idea of what a union would be fighting for.
 
This is interesting on that actually - in response to the success at Staten Island, the new Teamsters President has announced that the Teamsters are going to organise Amazon.

Happy to be corrected but I'm not aware that the Teamsters have done any organising in any Amazon workplace anywhere.

Had a look around - they tried and failed to get a recognition agreement in Alberta, Canada:

They've apparently had it as their top priority since last June, dunno if anything's come out of it other than that unsuccessful drive in Canada though:
 
AMAZON WILL BLOCK and flag employee posts on a planned internal messaging app that contain keywords pertaining to labor unions, according to internal company documents reviewed by The Intercept. An automatic word monitor would also block a variety of terms that could represent potential critiques of Amazon’s working conditions, like “slave labor,” “prison,” and “plantation,” as well as “restrooms” — presumably related to reports of Amazon employees relieving themselves in bottles to meet punishing quotas.


Orwell wasn't wrong so much as just a bit tardy.
 
Following Howard’s path is interesting for what it says about Amazon. She started her career at the private prison giant known as Corrections Corporation of America, which has since been renamed CoreCivic because it had such a toxic brand. (Some fun controversies involved letting private gangs run an Indiana prison to save costs, and stock manipulation.) At CCA, according to her LinkedIn page, Howard “re-vamped inmate admission process and revised all processing documentation. Resulted in a 20% reduction in inmate processing time and a reduced error rate.” Howard was apparently good at designing systems to herd prisoners. So naturally, she went to Amazon.

...

To be fair to Howard, she also made sure to run “Lean-In” circles for women in security at Amazon. The retail giant wants everyone to know, as it makes clear in this video, that it values diversity in its de facto prison guard unit.


 
Each of those points in the first image are only reinforced by union membership:

  • The union fights for you first. They are beholden to their members, not management or shareholders.
  • What if one cannot speak up because one is intimidated by management's inherent ability to make life difficult? Unions can provide the resources and solidarity needed to take action where it would be difficult if not impossible otherwise.
  • There's nothing more unnecessary than the unknowns and uncertainties brought about by perfidious and capricious managers and shareholders.
  • The presence of unions doesn't just benefit members, but it also benefits others. Any truly significant improvements in the workplace (i.e. not just pizza party bullshit) only come about from workers firmly putting their feet down in the face of the bosses' attempts at negotiating them down into meaningless frippery. Unions provide an organisational framework that helps to level the playing field against the big money.

I know I'm largely preaching to the choir here, but I hope that these crap "arguments" are indicative of how out of their depth the bosses are on this one.
 
Each of those points in the first image are only reinforced by union membership.

I know I'm largely preaching to the choir here, but I hope that these crap "arguments" are indicative of how out of their depth the bosses are on this one.
Yeah, it's endlessly frustrating when they try and pull that con, so disingenuous. The real concern is when people believe it, of course.
 
Yeah, it's endlessly frustrating when they try and pull that con, so disingenuous. The real concern is when people believe it, of course.
It worked in the US a couple of times, although they’re less restricted in how they fight against unionisation there (lots of well financed and flagrantly dishonest social media campaigns etc). The amount of money they throw at preventing unionisation is absurd, but it’s as much ideological as it is about protecting profits.
 
Back
Top Bottom