Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Employees at Unionized Maryland Store File Labor Board Complaint After Being Denied Benefits
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you're against a group of people consolidating their power in the form of a union then you should also be against people consolidating their power in the form of a corporation.
If not then you're just being hypocritical, and I question why.
If not then you're just being hypocritical, and I question why.
You’re right, but as with many things, the unions have outlived their usefulness. In fact, they often morph into something sinister because wherever there’s an opportunity for a power grab, someone is sure to exploit it. There’s a reason why the mob took control of the unions.
The only people I see fighting for “rights” in the US are people who view themselves as victims or well-to-do suburbanites who virtue signal because it eases their conscience.
There are always people who claim victimhood when they really aren't, and people who are just there to virtue-signal. But if you think that's all there is, maybe you aren't looking hard enough or you're looking in the wrong places.
And yes, power grabs happen everywhere, but why accuse only unions of doing it? Corporations do it all the time, too. Maybe not by mob tactics, but certainly by other means. I'm not saying it's ok for unions to collude with the mob, but it's not like all unions inevitably end up under mob control.
People keep claiming unions are outdated, but if not unions, who ends up fighting for and protecting worker's rights? The government? Individual workers standing up for their own rights? Some kind of workers lobbying group -- oh wait a minute, isn't that called a union?
Apple *is* a bully. Make no mistake about that! Stand up to the bully!
Apple tells prospective employees that getting a job at an Apple store is harder than getting accepted to Stanford University.
If their standards are so incredibly high the pay and benefits should reflect that exclusive status.
If their standards are so incredibly high the pay and benefits should reflect that exclusive status.
They were fair enough for the losers to accept the job to begin with, so it can't be that bad. If you don't like what you're being paid.. Leave.
They aren't though. Any moron could walk in and do it on 2 hours of training.
Sure, whatever you say.
Do you know the process and standards to get hired? From what I last heard you go through at least 4 interviews.
There's more to what Apple is looking for than just product knowledge.
The government.
Yes. State, Federal and Local labor laws are there to protect workers from abuse.
Can't have it both ways. Either in a union and subject to union rules or not in a union and work for your employer.
Citation please.
However, the pay for retail is high and the benefits are very good.
Apple pays their retail employees fair wages for the job they do. However, it's nice of you to give Apple's money away.
Can the government always be trusted to enforce these laws, or not to change them to favor corporations, when so many politicians take corporate contributions?
No, I think workers need to remain organized to protect themselves.
Not sure why it has to be either/or. Workers do work for their employers, and unions exist to make sure that workers are not unfairly exploited while they do that work. Sure, there would be less friction if there were no unions, but that would mean corporations mostly get to do whatever they want, and workers just get to take it or leave it.
If you worked there, you would know this is true. They say it constantly.
They don’t. The hourly rate is good for retail, but they hire employees at part time and don’t allow consistent schedules to let employees get second jobs. Full time positions are rarely opened and they pit many employees against each other for the openings. They cut hours dramatically during some months/weeks, then schedule people for 40 hours others. It doesn’t add up to a livable wage in the long run and they block their employees from being able to work two jobs. Their expectations are high for employees, but low for themselves. There could be a much more fair arrangement struck that wouldn’t affect them that much. People just want to pay their bills dude, it’s wild to want to reject them some stability in their work.
That’s my point… There is no need to seek gov’t or union help to create a better life for oneself. Laws are in place to protect the basic rights of workers. What exactly are these people fighting for that they can’t get elsewhere? Better pay? Better benefits? Better work/life balance? People are free to seek opportunities elsewhere. Judging by the millions of people who quit their jobs over the past year, it looks like many have done just that.
And if they don’t like any of the options they see, people are welcome to start their own business and pay their employees 6 figure salaries, provide free healthcare, and 6 week vacations for stocking shelves and talking to customers.
This bourgeoisie vs proletariat Marxist view of the world is not only outmoded, but very dangerous. It’s great for certain politicians that engage in identity politics, but it never leads to anything good.
So anecdotal. Got it.
I got this is your take on it, but corroboration to show it is true would be helpful. However, you can't blame Apple for scheduling people knowing when staffing is needed or not. But Apple still pays a fair wage for retail.
Yes. Workers will never be abused again. 13 years cannot work in dangerous conditions.
So let them organize. There is a downside to organizing. More power to them.
Isn't that the way collective bargaining works?
Workers cannot be exploited with fair labor laws in place. If you want to unionize more power to you. You get what you get when you unionize.
Yep and now workers get whatever they can through collective bargaining and what comes with that.
Lol great recovery for something you have no response to.
You’re wrong, and you know you’re wrong, so you jump to “prove it” mode. Classic tactic. Truly not worth anyone’s time engaging, you’re sold on this bizarre take and there’s no moving the needle. Take care.
And people kept saying Roe vs Wade is the law of the land, it'll never be repealed, and yet here we are.
I hope you never have to experience a law you depend on being suddenly repealed or stuck down. Or have a law that's supposed to protect you but it's not adequately enforced. Me, I've had too many such experiences to trust that laws never change.
Sorry, nothing you say can be corroborated. I get it's your hearsay on the matter of management telling employees it's harder to get a job here than to get admitted to Harvard, no problem with that being an opinion. Or for that matter the opinion that management schedules employees to make it as difficult as they can in getting a second job.
Who said that? It was the law of the land and now it changed. It's not the first time SCOTUS went back on and revisited one of their own rulings. But if you are suggesting there is any way a 13 year old will be allowed to do dangerous work, and/or a treasure trove of things that society would have some serious moral implications with, you are mistaken.
I don't know how this relates to unions, as the comments are so general in nature it could be anything. However, the discussion is about Apple, unless one considers customers dangerous, Apple I would guess doesn't have dangerous working conditions in the stores. But you pick the battle you want to fight in life. Fight for a career and the sky is the limit or fight for a union where your career is limited.
Apple more selective than Harvard:
It's Harder To Get A Job At The Apple Store Than It Is To Get Into Harvard
Apple had irregular scheduling practices employees complained about:
Apple Agrees to Improve Working Conditions for Retail Employees Amid Unionization Efforts
Apple is planning to make employee schedules at retail locations more flexible in an attempt to improve working conditions, reports Bloomberg. The...
www.macrumors.com
Yes, it was the law of the land, and now it's changed. So what makes you so sure that the current law that says 13 year olds can't do dangerous work will never change? What's different about one law than the other?
You keep saying unions are no longer needed, because laws protect workers. I'm saying those laws can change, if we don't protect them. And you are the one who brought up dangerous working conditions. I have no idea why you think fighting for a union limits your career. That sounds like a corporate talking point to discourage people from joining unions.