I think there's a simpler reason. If they show up in person, their faces and names can be discerned, allowing Amazon to keep a record of how each person voted. Of course, I don't know exactly how this mail-in procedure is going to be handled, so maybe they still can with an extra bribe.
It's hard to sympathize with either side, personally. Unions are a great idea that's kind of turned into a joke. At the same time, corporations are so absolutely assblasted over unions that they successfully pushed "diversity is our strength" because of some studies that showed it would make unions more rare.
Pretty much every study on diversity training shows it breeds emnity and hatred in the workplace, and sows division by highlighting what wasn't important before: 99% of all workers only think "is my coworker going to make my life harder or easier?" and that's it, but diversity training makes sure that "what protected classes is my coworker in? That could factor into if they're going to make my life harder or easier." passes through their mind. It turns an equal apathetic workplace into one that actively is hyperaware of race/gender/creed/whatever.
And you can't work well with someone who is going to make your life harder for no reason. Fact of life. So why would you join hands to make a union? Unions are about unity. And there can be no unity when there's tests showing Jeff from Manufacturing associates puppies with white people 0.01 seconds faster than associating them with black people. (Seriously, that subconscious bias test thing is the worst.)
It is entirely true that "diversity" has the oh so helpful side-effect of stopping not only unions, but any form of unified worker activities or collective bargaining efforts. In the same sense that Viagra is a blood health medicine with a "side-effect" of producing erections, no one ever would use it just for that side-effect, would they?
I think there's a simpler reason. If they show up in person, their faces and names can be discerned, allowing Amazon to keep a record of how each person voted. Of course, I don't know exactly how this mail-in procedure is going to be handled, so maybe they still can with an extra bribe.
It's hard to sympathize with either side, personally. Unions are a great idea that's kind of turned into a joke. At the same time, corporations are so absolutely assblasted over unions that they successfully pushed "diversity is our strength" because of some studies that showed it would make unions more rare.
Pretty much every study on diversity training shows it breeds emnity and hatred in the workplace, and sows division by highlighting what wasn't important before: 99% of all workers only think "is my coworker going to make my life harder or easier?" and that's it, but diversity training makes sure that "what protected classes is my coworker in? That could factor into if they're going to make my life harder or easier." passes through their mind. It turns an equal apathetic workplace into one that actively is hyperaware of race/gender/creed/whatever.
And you can't work well with someone who is going to make your life harder for no reason. Fact of life. So why would you join hands to make a union? Unions are about unity. And there can be no unity when there's tests showing Jeff from Manufacturing associates puppies with white people 0.01 seconds faster than associating them with black people. (Seriously, that subconscious bias test thing is the worst.)
It is entirely true that "diversity" has the oh so helpful side-effect of stopping not only unions, but any form of unified worker activities or collective bargaining efforts. In the same sense that Viagra is a blood health medicine with a "side-effect" of producing erections, no one ever would use it just for that side-effect, would they?
This is a very strong post.