Slashdot Mirror


Apple Sued For Turning Workers Into Slaves

SwiftyNifty writes "Apple employees are putting together a class action lawsuit for not receiving overtime pay. A Lawsuit filed Monday in California seeks class action status alleging that Apple denied technical staffers required overtime pay and meal compensation in violation of state law. Filed in the US District Court for Southern California, the complaint claims that many Apple employees are routinely subjected to working conditions resembling indentured servitude, or 'modern day slaves,' for lack of better words."

207 of 1,153 comments (clear)

  1. who pays a cultist? by evilkasper · · Score: 5, Funny

    cultists don't get payed

    1. Re:who pays a cultist? by rodney+dill · · Score: 5, Funny

      iMhotep... iMhotep... iMhotep...

      --

      Use your head, can't you, use your head,
      You're on earth, there's no cure for that
      - S. Beckett
    2. Re:who pays a cultist? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      YVAN EHT NOIJ

    3. Re:who pays a cultist? by SlipperHat · · Score: 5, Funny

      cultists don't get payed

      But they do get matching outfits and killer group discounts.

    4. Re:who pays a cultist? by FreeUser · · Score: 5, Funny

      cultists don't get payed

      But they do get matching outfits and killer group discounts.

      Best of all, drinks are on the house.

      --
      The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
    5. Re:who pays a cultist? by omnipresentbob · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hmmm... I think I shall jion the navy... If only I knew what it meant to jion...

    6. Re:who pays a cultist? by Sentry21 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think Apple should be commended for turning slaves into workers!

    7. Re:who pays a cultist? by MattGWU · · Score: 3, Funny

      Old Arabic word for 'infiltrate'. I'd expect a phone call pretty soon.

      --
      "These people look deep within my soul and assign me a number based on the order in which I joined" --Homer re:
  2. No, *THESE* are slaves by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you think YOU'RE a slave, try working in a iPod factory in China for a while. And be glad Apple at least hasn't outsourced you....yet.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Zymergy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Exactly, try to imagine *this* lawsuit in CHINA.... (ROFL)
      The same thing is happening to the American Auto Industry.... But SUV's don't fit into shipping containers so easily, so the industry settles for Mexico (rather than China) for cheap non-EEOC non-ADA non-EPA (etc...) production labor and closes as many of their (often union labor run) US plants as they can get away with.
      Hooray NAFTA! (/sarcasm)

    2. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by MightyYar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      try working in a iPod factory in China

      Yes, they are working 15-hour days and making "only" $50/month and living in shared dorms. But before they moved to the factory, they were still working 15-hour days as subsistence farmers, making no money, and living in squalor.

      So while I wouldn't trade my life for theirs (as an understatement), their lives (and the lives of their families) are appreciably BETTER - not worse - due to Apple's contractor's factory.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    3. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by oyenstikker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Honda, Toyota, and Subaru seem happy to build cars in the US.

      --
      The masses are the crack whores of religion.
    4. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Notquitecajun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Same with BMW. Great irony - it's cheaper for foreign auto makers to assemble here in the USA than it is for the Big Three...mostly because of overbearing union activity. The American auto industry needs to be rebuilt from the ground up. It's probably going to happen with one of the new electric car manufacturers, but there's room here for a new American auto company if someone wants to risk the billions+ $$ investment to do it from scratch.

    5. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, but look at the states they build in. They are non Union right to work states. The real issue is that Unions are now chocking their very businesses to death.

    6. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by meringuoid · · Score: 3, Funny
      If you think YOU'RE a slave, try working in a iPod factory in China for a while.

      Or, worse yet, try playing football for Manchester United...

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    7. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Funny

      iWork, iSlave...iSolonely, iCouldcry

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    8. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by KeepQuiet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      .... their lives (and the lives of their families) are appreciably BETTER - not worse - due to Apple's contractor's factory.

      The point you make is the exact point all corporations make in order to exploit cheap foreign labor. "Well, their lives sucked, so let us pay them peanuts, then they must be happy"

      Also it is beyond my understanding that someone tells us that what is being done is good for them without seeing there, talking to anyone working there. Don't you think it is way too arrogant to "know" what is good for them?

    9. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by fprintf · · Score: 5, Informative

      So how does this compare, to BMW for example, where their German workforce is also highly unionized? Have they essentially done the same thing as the U.S. automakers, essentially shipping jobs away from heavy regulations in favor of lighter ones?

      A quick Google search http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=bmw+unionization+U.S.+plants tells me that the U.S. plant is non-unionized but pays competitive wages. What this doesn't say is how their non-wage costs, benefits and retirement for example, compare with their unionized force in German and with the Big 3.

      --
      This post brought to you by your friendly neighborhood MBA.
    10. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      actually when you're working as a subsistence farmer, you're at least growing your own food so you don't have to waste the crap pay you get on buying food from someone else. the working conditions, while they might not be great on a farm, are a damn sight healthier than they are in an electronics factory. i don't think your argument that their lives are better simply because they bring home money instead of food is very well thought out.

    11. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Enderandrew · · Score: 3, Funny

      Apples most successful product:

      iPerbole

      --
      http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
    12. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by ScuzzMonkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Also it is beyond my understanding that someone tells us that what is being done is good for them without seeing there, talking to anyone working there. Don't you think it is way too arrogant to "know" what is good for them?

      Seems to me that goes both ways. A lot of folks agitating for changes in oversea working conditions (at least with respect to China) might be very surprised to learn the actual opinions of all those poor, downtrodden folks they are "protecting."

      --
      No relation to Happy Monkey
    13. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by radarsat1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Also it is beyond my understanding that someone tells us that what is being done is good for them without seeing there, talking to anyone working there. Don't you think it is way too arrogant to "know" what is good for them?

      Though I don't necessarily agree with the grandparent post, I just wanted to point out here that you could replace the word "good" with "bad" in the above paragraph and it would be equally true.

      And yes, I agree with you, I think it would be pretty enlightening to have an actual conversation with some of these "sweat factory" workers to see how really happy or unhappy they are. All the media attention on this subject is pretty much always biased one way or the other, I find it almost impossible to figure out what the actual situation is. Which is too bad, because I would let it affect my purchasing decisions if I actually knew the truth. As it is though, I can't even follow the number of boycotts that are called for left and right on every product under the sun, so I'd go crazy trying to do the "right thing".

    14. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by TrippTDF · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I do tech support for an older guy (he's about 80) who used to work as a garment importer. By all accounts, he's a progressive, open minded guy. We were talking one day and he said that China is portrayed incorrectly here- Yes, workers over there don't make as much as we do, but to live the good life, they don't really have to.

      He said he had spent some time in China, and saw that the general public was actually living pretty well. Yes, there are human rights violations, and the government there is oppressive, but there are some things (I think Apple is probably a good example) that look bad at the outset, but from the point of view of the workers there, are OK. Part of the problem, I think, is we are equating a dollar amount to life quality, and I don't think it is too simple- there's cultural differences here, and there is simply scale in general.... while we think working 15 hour days is ridiculous, let's keep in mind that a lot of people in China pray for any employment... remember that China's population is measured in BILLIONS- there's just not enough work to go around.

    15. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Daemonax · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're absolutely correct. It has made their lives better. Most libertarians will say that people working in sweatshops should be free to work there, and that their lives are better. This is correct. The problem is that libertarians don't seem to criticize the practices that keep these sweatshop workers in these conditions. When the workers dare to try to protest or unionize to be able to try to make things better for themselves, they are often brutally suppressed, rather than being given the freedom to organize and speak out. The freedom for them to work at low wages is fine, but taking away their freedom to organize and try to bring about change is not fine, it is strange that libertarians don't seem to criticize this when it is business that is supressing, yet if a government such as the Chinese Communist Party suppresses desent and stops people organizing to bring about change, libertarians will quickly criticize this, though perhaps that's because libertarians are already critical of government and are able to more easily see the problems with it, but seem to be dazzled by the ability of business to lift people out of poverty, and don't see it when business tries to keep people in poverty. Even as prominent libertarian and Nobel prize winning economist Milton Friedman said, (I'm paraphrasing here) 'a free market is not enough for a free society but it is an essential part.' There needs to be social/political freedom as well as a free market.

    16. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      it's cheaper for foreign auto makers to assemble here in the USA than it is for the Big Three...mostly because of overbearing union activity

      Let me call a big BULLS%#T on that. First, Germany has much more powerful employee bargaining and safeguards and other pro-union policies and unions than the US does.

      Second, although the big three love to blame all their problems on the unions, they've found enough cash to buy out most of the other automakers on the planet (volvo, saab, jaguar, subaru, range rover ... to name just a few). Yet they haven't found the cash to refit and retool their american factories. They don't bother with those factories, because they can always promise investors short-term profits by shutting down a few factories and putting 10s of thousands of Americans out of work, knowing that in a few months or a year they'll be able to hire (some) again when production picks up.

      Meanwhile, the *newly built* foreign carmakers' factories can produce more vehicles more efficiently with greater quality control. With (surprise) those same American workers.

      But no, please, blame the workers. It's clearly all their fault.

    17. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by jacquesm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      it's mostly because of tariffs, not because of the unions.

    18. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by antirelic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I dont know (I didnt RTFA) what their salaries are, but I am pretty sure that these "poor" "slaves" are making more than 75% than the rest of the people living in the USA (which makes them make more than 99% than the rest of the people in the world).

      See, thing about *slavery* is that you dont have a "choice". If these "poor" "slaves" don't like how Apple does business, quit, and get another job. Oh, and dont take "perks" which require "repayment" if you leave after a certain amount of time (if this is what they are referring to as indentured servitude).

      And yes, I know, they are claiming that Apple "broke-the-law" which Apple should pay(if they indeed did break the law). But calling them *modern day slaves* is just fucking stupid.

      --
      20th century Marxism is not progress...
    19. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Gewalt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Blaming the union != Blaming the workers

      --
      Modding Trolls +1 inciteful since 1999
    20. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by mea37 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On one hand, I agree that the language seems to lack perspective -- though really, is that surprising in today's culture?

      On the other hand, the reason baseline working conditions are higher here is because we enforce labor laws that don't exist there, which is what these workers claim to want done at Apple. I don't know the merits of their case, obviously; that's what the court is for. But if they honestly believe the laws aren't being followed, then a factory in China is actually a pretty good image to support their position, under the heading "we don't want to head down this path".

      (And just to be clear -- I often argue against "slipperly slope" logic, and certainly I wouldn't claim that by allowing unpaid overtime we're necessarily starting a progression toward sweatshops with insane hours and no minimum wage. However, I am saying that either you enforce your laws or you don't -- there's no slope to talk about. If we want to discuss unpaid overtime as an isolated concept, then we would be discussing whether the law should change.)

    21. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by CowTipperGore · · Score: 4, Interesting

      A quick Google search http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=bmw+unionization+U.S.+plants tells me that the U.S. plant is non-unionized but pays competitive wages.

      Toyota does the same thing in the US. They pay union wages and union benefits in order to keep the union out. Some of their plants have unionized and Toyota is very careful to make sure that non-union plants keep pace with the wages and benefits of the union plants. If you are getting the same benefits without paying union dues, why would employees want a union? Makes sense on both sides as long as Toyota has a few union shops to keep them honest.

      To be fair to GM and Ford, they have a generation or two of union costs on them that the new Toyota and Honda ventures do not. Let's see if the Asian manufactures can continue as they are now after they have as many US retirees as US employees. Maybe they can, but I'll be surprised.

    22. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why yes, it's true, just like all those African's were much better off when they were brought to America, sure, they were slaves, and they spent all day picking cotton and all they got back was a bowl of soup and a lumpy bed, but hey, when they were slaves in Africa, they were working even harder and getting even less food and no bed, they all had a much better life in the US, those white slave owners did them a big favour.

      Wait, you not going to suddenly go all inconsistent and say that's totally different are you?

    23. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 5, Interesting

      So how does this compare, to BMW for example, where their German workforce is also highly unionized? Have they essentially done the same thing as the U.S. automakers, essentially shipping jobs away from heavy regulations in favor of lighter ones?

      I don't think it's so much the strength of the labor regulations - though if you're going to move, choosing less restrictive countries makes sense. But I think it's more of a "do-over". Once your workforce has gone union in a particular country, it's pretty much impossible to un-unionize it, so you basically have to move it overseas somewhere and fight the unionization move there if you want to survive. So Japanese and German companies can make cars in the US, the US companies can make cars in Mexico, etc.

    24. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by penguin_dance · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Unions aren't needed where people are treated fairly. The union has been trying to get it's way into foreigned-owned car manufactureres like Toyota and Nissan for years. AFAIK, the UAW has been unable to succeed. Twice the vote to unionized at Nissan has been voted down 2 to 1.

      Personally I have no respect for unions anymore since they are actively trying to unionize illegal workers. The union was supposed to be about protecting American jobs, not encouraging those who are breaking the law. Now it's all about the $$$.

      But the only real way to get manufacturers back in the US is for it to be more expensive for goods from overseas to come into the US than to be manufactured here. But neither party seems willing to do anything to stop US companies from outsourcing to countries with minimal wages and even more minimal safety practices.

      --
      If you've never been modded as "flamebait" or "troll," you've never tried to argue a minority viewpoint here!
    25. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Informative

      I can't talk to them because they speak Chinese. But I have worked with them and have spoken to the factory engineers who do speak English.

      They aren't all "happy", and nor are they all "sad". That's too simplistic. They are people with a wide range of emotions. Most of them - as I said before - were subsistence farmers and most have no education. None at all. They can't read or write.

      The competition for labor is fierce. They move around from factory to factory seeking higher pay (the engineers do this, too). They aren't slaves that are compelled to work in one place.

      Would they rather be living with their families? Certainly some (most?) would. Are they happy to have a full belly and some money to send back home? Absolutely.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    26. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by TheGreek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Think of it each time you buy a trinket advertised on TV -- you seem to have drunk their cool-aid...

      Who manufactured the components in the computer you're using to post on Slashdot?

    27. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by nicklott · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, they assemble in the US because of the anti-competitive proctectionist tariffs in place on auto imports to the US. It costs them the same as the big three, it's just that they are better and more efficiently run companies. All this bullshit about union costs dragging them down is a smokescreen; Germany is one of the most highly unionized countries in the world with astronomical rates of tax, yet BMW seem to manage ok.

    28. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Informative

      Protecting a domestic job artificially costs the entire society in productivity lost and higher cost of goods sold. It's like enacting a tax to benefit the factory worker.

      Besides the economic mumbo-jumbo, the choices aren't "$50/month for an iPod maker in China vs. $2500/month for an iPod maker in the west". In reality, the production line would include a lot more automation if it had to be produced in the west. Just look at western vs. Chinese coal mines. Also, if products cost more, fewer would be sold and so even fewer workers would be needed. How many iPods do you think Apple would sell if the price doubled or tripled?

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    29. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by hrieke · · Score: 2, Informative

      I have a housemate who is a anthropologist (expert in China and Taiwan), and I asked her the one question which has been rattling my brain for a while- what do the Chinese factory workers think of America based on the things that they make for us to buy?

      Believe it or not there is a documentary on this subject called "Marti Gras, Made In China".

      Interesting and worth seeing! It does change your mind about a few things, from both sides of the conversation.

      --
      III.IIVIVIXIIVIVIIIVVIIIIXVIIIXIIIIIIIIVIIIIVVIIIV IIVIIIIIIVIII...
    30. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by data_monk · · Score: 3, Interesting

      To be fair to GM and Ford, they have a generation or two of union costs on them that the new Toyota and Honda ventures do not. Let's see if the Asian manufactures can continue as they are now after they have as many US retirees as US employees. Maybe they can, but I'll be surprised.

      The extra generation of union costs that have really brought down the big 3 (2 1/2 really) were the pension funds and healthcare. Pensions are no longer expected in new factories since most workers under the age of 30 have no traces of the concept in their memory. If the foreign manufacturers can find ways to keep health care costs under control they will continue to have a serious advantage over GM and Ford and be able to keep the "built in the USA" perception.

    31. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Teun · · Score: 3, Interesting
      But in Germany you elect to be a union member, there is no closed shop.

      Legislation draws a line on which to build a contract, that way there is no reason for bitter strife between company and unions about very basic things like health care and pensions.

      The weirdest is that Germany does not have a legal minimum wage yet any reputable(!) company pays well above what is minimum in comparable countries.

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    32. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by demachina · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "don't like how Apple does business, quit, and get another job"

      The funny thing about labor markets is if one employer gets away with abusive practices, especially a prominent one, pretty soon they all do it to compete and you wont have any place better to go. Not saying Apple's conditions are abusive, some people could just be whining, but practices at a lot of high tech companies are pretty abusive and probably getting more so.

      Unless there is a serious shortage of workers its expected for employers to devolve to the lowest common denominator they can get away with. With a planet bursting at the seems with workers, with globalization, the internet, container ships and fiber optics, the whole world is now the labor pool which means, chances are, working for the man is gonna suck from now on.

      You sound like one of those people that thinks the invisible hand of free markets will solve all problems. The only problem is all indications are the invisible hand, unchecked, will result in a small percentage of the world's population, the ones with capital being extremely rich and everyone else being extremely poor. Around 1900 working conditions in the U.S. were pretty similar to China, and wealth was concentrating in the hand of the few. It took the progressive movement, labor unions, and a World War II fueled boom to raise the standard of living for everyone in the U.S. We are now seeing wealth concentration at a disturbing level again and that living standard crater for working people, partially thanks to the Bush administration. A hedge fund manager making billions of dollars a year pays taxes at 15%. Most working people pay around %37.5 counting income and all payroll taxes, and not counting regressive sales taxes. Most people didn't notice but the Republicans instituted an extremely regressive tax system designed to destroy working people and to make the rich, very rich, very fast.

      There is an interesting twist lately for manufacturing workers. With soaring oil prices its becoming very expensive to ship heavy commodities and manufactured good half way around the world. The cost for shipping containers from China to U.S. have gone from $3000 to $8000 and container ships are dropping their speed %20 to save fuel increasing shipping times. I read that some manufacturers targeting the U.S. are moving from China back to Mexico to reduce shipping costs.

      --
      @de_machina
    33. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by BasharTeg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wow, I've made some generalizations in my time, but to make a billion person generalization, that's amazing.

      I know your 80 year old friend has seen a lot of years, but I highly doubt with 1 billion people, he has seen nearly enough of the quality of life of at the very least hundreds of millions of Chinese who are drinking water poisoned by industry and starving because their natural food sources like fish are being wiped out.

      On top of that, working 15 hours a day for peanuts is what it is. There's no amount of "relative" standard you can apply to it to spin it to sound not so bad.

      This kind of #1 economy apologism is the type of disgusting crap you see from Bill O'Reilly. "They don't need more than a couple dollars a day. They don't know any better. They have enough money to buy a bowl of rice and they're happy." The fact that someone has meager goals because they live in a poor situation isn't a justification for the broad statements that presume that they're satisified and happy with their quality of life.

      Now personally I believe this is China's problem to deal with internally and we have our own domestic poor that we're not handling that well, but to try to escape any moral association with taking advantage of disgusting labor conditions and wages by making uninformed generalizations and excuses about how self-limiting they are...

      I think the argument is ridiculous, the points brought up are illogical and unsupported, and generally the whole effort to whitewash the situation turns my stomach.

    34. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by CowTipperGore · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If the foreign manufacturers can find ways to keep health care costs under control they will continue to have a serious advantage over GM and Ford...

      My brother works for a Toyota plant. They have a pharmacy on site where employees can get over the counter medicine for free. Toyota pays 100% of his monthly premium and his coverage is significantly better than any I've had anywhere I've worked. They already absorb much more of their employees' health care costs than most corporations, which they can do thanks to little retiree benefit costs right now.

      ...and be able to keep the "built in the USA" perception.

      Perception? Their vehicles are "built in the USA" more so than the so-called American car companies.

    35. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by afxgrin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It just comes down to poor strategy in North America. The big 3 had just built plants maybe 10 years ago to pump out trucks, SUVs and minivans, and found themselves scrambling because consumers started demanding cars again. So they will be losing money due to those investments made not too long ago - building a plant is certainly not cheap.

    36. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wait, you not going to suddenly go all inconsistent and say that's totally different are you?

      That's totally disingenuous. The Chinese subsistence farmers leave on their own accord (actually have to be kept out of the cities by force). African slaves were rounded up, chained up, and sold. Chinese factory workers can go back to their families on the farm, or can change jobs (and frequently do) as they are not indentured or bound to their employer. Slaves could not go anywhere.

      There are certainly elements of the Chinese government's policy that I think infringe on human rights - but to call it slavery is frankly disgusting, since there ARE people living as slaves today (mostly in the sex trade IIRC).

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    37. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by mikael · · Score: 3, Informative

      And at the same time, the factory owners are moving to the inner provinces as wages demands keep increasing, thus increasing the demand for transportation.

      Riot at McDonalds toy making factory

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    38. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by jb.cancer · · Score: 3, Funny

      So how does this compare, to BMW for example, where their German workforce is also highly unionized?

      No! quite the opposite (they were very ionized) and had to be degaussed.

    39. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by nine-times · · Score: 5, Insightful

      while we think working 15 hour days is ridiculous, let's keep in mind that a lot of people in China pray for any employment... remember that China's population is measured in BILLIONS- there's just not enough work to go around.

      If there's not enough work to go around, then how come people have to work 15 hours a day to do it?

    40. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by darkmeridian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Also it is beyond my understanding that someone tells us that what is being done is good for them without seeing there, talking to anyone working there. Don't you think it is way too arrogant to "know" what is good for them?

      All I have to know is that the sweatshop workers decided, on their own free will, to go and work for Apple under those conditions to conclude that this is better for them than the alternatives. I am not arrogant enough to think I know better than they do what's good for them. Note that they might hate their job, but it's better than the alternatives.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    41. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by m.ducharme · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As a left-libertarian, I object to your lumping of all libertarians into anti-unionists. Clearly your example is one where less government control will make big improvements in the lot of ordinary people, which is, as you point out, the libertarian thesis of both the right and left.

      Don't be sucked in by the weird American right-lib notion that there should only be enough government to give corporations the power/right to rape the people. That's only one form of libertarianism, despite what people here would have you believe. Personally, I'd like to see only enough government to protect the rights of people, and the first thing to go in my ideal world would be the rules that allow corporations to exploit their labour.

      --
      Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
    42. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by XorNand · · Score: 4, Informative

      Because you don't just declare your workers to be independent contractors when you treat them like employees. The IRS is *very* specific about worker classifications. If you're misclassified as an independent contractor, the company can be hit with serious fines and potentially face criminal tax evasion charges. I know this because I am currently fighting my 1099 classification with a former employer. Check out IRS Form SS8 for more information about the guidelines.

      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    43. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by SuperQ · · Score: 3, Funny

      [citation needed]

    44. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by gurps_npc · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The problem with GM and Ford's union contracts are not the pay or the schedule or the benefits even.

      The problem continues to be:

      1. Man power requirements (You need an electrician to change the break room's lightbulb. No, it can't be the same electrician that changes the factory floor lightbulb.)

      2. Incrediblly stupid retirement plans. Among them the "Economy Killer" 'defined benefit' plans instead of 401Ks. They killed the airlines before big oil did, and they killed Detroit.

      --
      excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
    45. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by orasio · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Personally I have no respect for unions anymore since they are actively trying to unionize illegal workers. The union was supposed to be about protecting American jobs, not encouraging those who are breaking the law. Now it's all about the $$$.

      Unions are about protecting workers, as people.
      Solidarity with your fellow worker doesn't necessarily end at the border, at least not for all of us. The whole idea of unionizing is to avoid exploited workers. Illegal immigrants are more vulnerable to that. In fact, their vulnerability is what makes them more interesting for employers.
      If illegal immigrants were unionized, they would lose some of their appeal as slave workers, which could even have a beneficial effect for all workers.

    46. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by mattwarden · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your argument is valid only if we are talking about completely unskilled labor that requires no training. Otherwise, there is a fixed cost per worker, so it is cheaper for 1 worker to work 15 hours than 2 worker to each work 7.5 hours, assuming no loss of quality for fatigue.

    47. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you look back at why unions starter (1920s, 1930s) you will see that most of those reasons (child labor, very unsafe working conditions, no 'fair' pay i.e. working for a 5 cents a day when a day was 18 hours long) have been taken care of by laws.

      What does a union get you today? The union set our pay give you more money? If you notice, the more you make the more your union dues are. Have you ever actually been to a union negotiation? The union person and the company person agree to the new contract in under an hour. Then the script is made. The union guys says you will not give us this so I will walk out and we will have a walk out/strike for a two days. Then we will come back and sign. All this over a really nice lunch/dinner. I asked the 7 negotiators that I know on both sides Teamsters, and the business side (three different companies that have each been around for more then 70 years) it was very similar stories. They usually get the contract made in 1-2 hours. Then depending on who got more (workers/the company) they kill time or start the script. Remember the union itself always wins. the workers who pay the union may get a crappy contract. Then the next contract might be better.

      The biggest hurdle is the vote. If you don't know, you are told by the union to vote yes or no to a contract. If the union says vote yes and enough workers vote no, that causes a problem. That can happen but usually doesn't. My brother (who works for the telephone company) is being told by the union right now how to vote on his contract.

      I find that very odd that the union says vote yes or no. Shouldn't the workers decide that for themselves?

      Most unions today are not needed and should go away. I would say all but I do not know about every union. There may be a few that are actually helping the workers. So far, the unions I have seen have all made sure that they (the union) gets paid. Sometimes at the cost of the company, usually at the cost of the workers they are supposed to be helping.

    48. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by MasterD · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Most of them - as I said before - were subsistence farmers and most have no education. None at all. They can't read or write.

      At least at Foxconn where iPods and iPhones are made, all the workers have equivalent of high school educations and must be able to read and write. They must read instruction cards for their stations and write test results down on carrier cards.

    49. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by data_monk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you look back at why unions starter (1920s, 1930s) you will see that most of those reasons (child labor, very unsafe working conditions, no 'fair' pay i.e. working for a 5 cents a day when a day was 18 hours long) have been taken care of by laws.

      Most unions today are not needed and should go away. I would say all but I do not know about every union. There may be a few that are actually helping the workers. So far, the unions I have seen have all made sure that they (the union) gets paid. Sometimes at the cost of the company, usually at the cost of the workers they are supposed to be helping.

      I agree that most of the existing unions probably accomplished what they set out to do a couple of decades ago. I would argue that the biggest contribution the larger unions make today is in helping to identify other areas which have not had union representation in the past and are behind the times in wages and benefits; I'm thinking mainly of the fast food/service industry that has been trying to catch up recently. Of course, the existing unions have more than just an altruistic motive to help these other groups unionize; there is that whole lobbying industry to support. I can't remember, have lobbyists unionized yet?

    50. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Muad'Dave · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unions are about protecting workers, as people.

      Unions used to be about protecting workers, as people.

      There, fixed that for you.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    51. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by antirelic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What abusive business practices are you talking about? From what I've read, Apple has always been a kinda "grindhouse". Coming from your mindset, Google should be a grindhouse too, since Apple can get away with it. Or perhaps it should be the other way around. Or, maybe more likely, different companies are going to run different ways, regardless of what other companies do (outside of adopting some semi-standard business practices such as time sheets, etc..).

      While I might sound like one of "those people" who think the invisible hand of free market will "solve all problems", you sound like one of those far left leaning quasi-communists that believe the oppressive hand of government will create equality for everyone and spread the wealth around. Highly regulated markets are always better than free markets. Right USSR? I know its somehow appealing that the "magical government people" can somehow make things "equal and better" the dangers of the free market are BY AND FAR less dangerous than imposing government. As for your "concentration of wealth" argument, there is alot more to do with new innovations and technologies that created alot of opportunities for small businesses to become big business over the course of a century. Wealth consolidation always happens. Always (just pick up a history book).

      Today is the best day to be alive in the history of human kind (outside a few select places). Globalization has improved the conditions of humanity on a scale NEVER witnessed before in human history. And to top it off, much of that globalization, and massive improvements have happened while your most hated enemy, GW Bush, was president of that most horrible nation, the USA (which gives to charities/poor/sick more than all other nations combined). Need a good example, take a look at the contributions to Africa from the nations that RAPED that continent (here's looking to you Europe) compared to the USA. Shameful isnt it?

      --
      20th century Marxism is not progress...
    52. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by blincoln · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Most unions today are not needed and should go away. I would say all but I do not know about every union.

      I keep hearing people mention this opinion, and yet it seems to me like the non-union skilled jobs in the US (specifically tech jobs) have conditions and pay that are well below what unions achieve for e.g. machinists and longshoremen.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    53. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Black-Man · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Toyota has an engine plant in WV, which used to be a very pro-union state. The UAW attempted to get into the plant and the vote went against them. Toyota had a great sign outside the facility:

      "Toyota 25 years Manufacturing in the USA...

      No Plant Closings...
      No Layoffs...
      No Union!"

    54. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but plenty of countries have highly skilled workers with sane working hours. If there's not enough work to go around, the government should force companies to pay overtime when employees work over 40 hours, and then there will be incentive to spread the work around.

      I get the impression that the Chinese government is more interested in advancing their global power and economy, and are willing to let their citizens pay the price to get there.

    55. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Snocone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Witty, but not relevant to this situation.

      What is actually relevant to this situation is the routine exposure of corruption among the recruiting process for these allegedly horrific conditions.

      So, to connect your phrasing to reality,

      "Why, my nigger paid the overseer under the table his entire family's life savings plus sold two of his daughters to get to work for me! Don't have to ask him nuttin' do ya?"

      When there no longer are stories of that sort about how desperately people bribe anyone they can to get a chance at these allegedly horrific conditions, then perhaps there might be something to discuss.

      In the meantime, the politest thing you can say about people who think there is a problem is that they are not familiar with the alternatives available to the workers, and they lack the basic grasp of economics that the only historically effective way to improve working conditions has been to reduce labor surplus, which is most effectively done by increasing number of jobs. (In a few cases restricting supply by unionization or its bastard cousin "professional certification" works too, yes, but simply growing the economy so jobs outpace workforce growth is much better as it does not restrict the freedom of individuals.)

    56. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 5, Informative

      If demand for work is higher than supply of work, then people who provide work can charge a premium; this translates to increased hours.

      In other words, one worker for 15 hours is one bed and three meals. Two workers for 8 hours is two beds and six meals.

      If there were more work than workers, workers could dictate their hours, their pay, and their benefits. Make sense?

    57. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by NtroP · · Score: 2, Interesting

      actually when you're working as a subsistence farmer, you're at least growing your own food so you don't have to waste the crap pay you get on buying food from someone else. the working conditions, while they might not be great on a farm, are a damn sight healthier than they are in an electronics factory.

      You live and work in the city, don't you. As someone who was both raised in a third-world country and worked on a farm, I can tell you that, although a good, hard day's work is rewarding, it's not nearly as romantic as TV makes it seem. Also, it is the goal of almost everyone I've known to "grow up" and "get a job in the city". See, they have the same romantic notion as you do, but in reverse.

      I can tell you though that those people who are lucky enough to get hired by a multi-national corporation to work in the factory are grateful for the work and pay. They would work longer hours if they could because it means more money for their families. Having the do-gooders from first-world countries barge in, "improve" their pay and working conditions to the point where the workforce is downsized really pisses them off.

      Americans and Europeans are soft and spoiled when it comes to working and earning a living. I work in IT. I am considered an "exempt" employee. I'm payed to make sure things get done and work correctly, period. If I had to do that in the confines of a 9-5 work day, while having to go through an approval and justification process every time I needed to take over time, I could not do my job nearly as well. I don't get over time. I often work 60-hour weeks. I have over 3 months of unused vacation time. Boo Hoo. If it's that bad I can quit. I can quit because I have a good education and a marketable skill. I get paid well for what I do.

      Bringing this back to the Apple engineers: I think they are whiners. I think they should go work for Dell, or McDonalds. If they didn't want to work the long hours they should have quit. If enough people do that Apple will have to change their policies. However, I'll bet there are 10 people who'd kill to get a chance to take their job, even knowing the conditions. No one *owes* you a job. My contract says that I can be let go at any time, without notice. I have to sign a new contract every July. I'm not overly worried though. I know that what I do is valuable. I know that I am good at what I do.

      I give the company good value for their money and in exchange I get a fair salary and good benefits. I put in an honest day's work for an honest day's pay. Would I like to earn more? Sure. Who wouldn't? Am I worth more? Probably. Can my employer afford to pay me more? Not right now. If I can do something to save them money and make them more productive then I may be able to negotiate a better wage. Do they owe it to me? Absolutely not. It's my job to save them money and make them more productive.

      Not everyone sees it that way, of course. We get new kids, right out of college who grumble about not making as much as I do, when I've been doing this for 25 years and have been working here for more than 10 years. They think the world owes them a living. They show up to work late. Go home early. Get drunk on the weekend and call in sick every Monday. They stay up so late playing XBox that they are half asleep at work the next day. An they have the gaul to complain about how much they earn and how unfair their bosses are. Whining babies!

      Well, I don't know how this rant got to where it is from what I was responding to, but just putting food on you own table by working on a farm is not always enough. Especially if you need to pay for other things, like medical bills, an education, clothes, etc. Working on a farm is not the glamour life you're making it out to be.

      --
      "terrorism" and "pedophilia" are the root passwords to the Constitution
    58. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Bryansix · · Score: 2, Informative

      Uh, both of those jobs involve physical risk. Longshoremen and machinists die every year from their jobs. You cannot compare them to tech jobs. Yes the long hours and skills required are at the same level but the risk isn't there.

    59. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by MightyYar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I stand corrected. They are making more than $50/month then?

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    60. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by LeneJ · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is a very American way of running unions. I just want to point out that it works differently in other countries (I used to be a union rep abroad)

      --
      Un paio di scarpe, per favore!
    61. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by MaWeiTao · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yeah, and when unions in Europe strike they pretty much grind the entire nation to a halt.

      I am convinced that unions have crippled the automakers, but I do also agree that management has brought this on themselves. They're constantly reacting to the market instead of innovating. And there seems to be this endless stream of poor decisions. Instead of improving the overall lineup they keep focusing on individual, flagship models they think will somehow turn everything around for them.

      I think Chrysler is pretty much doomed with nothing compelling in their lineup and they seem ill-equipped to address high fuel prices. Ford has an excellent inventory of cars available overseas that they stupidly haven't imported to the US. GM is currently showing the most potential, but they've got a bloated lineup and they're still making some questionable decisions. They're still focused on the symptoms and not on the source of their problems.

      The problem with unions is that they're out for their own interests and are often willing to run a company into the ground if they dont get their way. What's troubling is this push to eliminate private ballots which the democrats seem keen on supporting. Basically, union leaders would be privy to how employees have voted and could more easily pressure them into voting their way. I'm shocked this is even being seriously considered. It seems unconstitutional to me.

    62. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, they assemble in the US because of the anti-competitive proctectionist tariffs in place on auto imports to the US. It costs them the same as the big three, it's just that they are better and more efficiently run companies. All this bullshit about union costs dragging them down is a smokescreen; Germany is one of the most highly unionized countries in the world with astronomical rates of tax, yet BMW seem to manage ok.

      And Mercedes, too. They do well because they make a superior product. Their cars have a certain allure due to name recognition and prestige in some demographics, but I don't think that's the key to their success. The reason they are so successful is that they design and build cars very well. A typical Mercedes requires a tiny fraction of the maintenance of a typical Ford. My 30 year old Mercedes sedan with 400k+ miles has its original breaks, has never had its alignment adjusted or brakes replaced (!) and it drives better than most brand new sports cars. My 10 year old Ford Explorer with ~120k miles had its brakes fall off while driving every 5-10k miles if I don't replace them first, that is until I bought non-Ford brakes, after which they performed much better. It's also on its third transmission and second engine.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    63. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "If illegal immigrants were unionized, they would lose some of their appeal as slave workers, which could even have a beneficial effect for all workers."

      How about actually enforcing our current laws making it ILLEGAL to even think of hiring ILLEGAL workers in the US? Then, there would be no need for unionizing them, no more exploitation of people scared to speak up due to being here as illegal non-citizens...not to mention less of a drag on the ER rooms (illegals main source of healthcare), and schools...etc.

      Get rid of the slave labor by making it highly toxic to business if caught with even a single illegal alien employed here...that will try up the incentive to come here illegally, and will help US citizens and those here legally to have better wages, etc.

      Just ask those in the house building industry how illegals have killed the market for US workers who want to raise families in a normal environment, not live 12 to a room/shack or tent somewhere and send what money they do make back home via Western Union.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    64. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by DrHyde · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm a member of a union here in the UK, and have been for fifteen years. Any employee who isn't is a damned fool.

      The union does *not* set my pay - that's a matter for me to negotiate with my boss. Nor does the union tell me how to vote. Unions these days, at least for professionals like me, are mostly about me keeping informed of what my rights are, and having free access to specialist land-sharks in the unlikely event that I ever need an employment lawyer. In that sense it's really just an insurance policy, insuring me against my employer being a dick.

      If I were an easily-replaced manual labourer, then I'd appreciate collective bargaining, but even so, I would still have a choice of whether to take part in it or whether to make my own deal with the boss.

      US unions appear to be seriously broken and can't be compared to unions elsewhere.

    65. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Now personally I believe this is China's problem to deal with internally and we have our own domestic poor that we're not handling that well, but to try to escape any moral association with taking advantage of disgusting labor conditions and wages by making uninformed generalizations and excuses about how self-limiting they are...

      Assuming you're American, like me, I disagree that this isn't our problem. Paying people $50/month to work 15 hour days is making America and its industries poor. This is non-intuitive to a lot of people, probably most people. After all, it seems like our exploiting this cheap labor market should mean that we're coming out as the economic victors. However, the goods being manufactured are being sold back in the U.S. The net effect of the exploitation for us, from a purely monetary standpoint, is that money that was circulating in our country is now circulating in another country, making our country poorer.

      Yes, it would be more expensive to have the manufacturing done in America. However, the money spent to pay people in America would increase the spending power of Americans, who are the target market of the majority of the goods manufactured for American companies.

      Thus, the astronomically higher expense of paying American workers would make these businesses sustainable (more money comes in to make up for money going out) and their workers' quality of life sustainable. My argument is absolutely proven by integrating over the effect described in my first paragraph. The result is called the trade deficit, and the fact that it is a huge positive number proves that the cost "savings" made by outsourcing to cheaper labor markets must disappear in the long term. Luckily, by then the executives in charge of Nike, McDonald's, etc. will be able to depart with huge severance packages before that happens.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    66. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by smooth+wombat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I find that very odd that the union says vote yes or no. Shouldn't the workers decide that for themselves?

      Yes, you would think that but guess what, there is a bill called "The Employee Free Choice Act" which ostensibly aims to allow people to unionize more easily at work places. However, and here's the kicker, the union gets to see how you vote.

      So, if you're like me and recognize the sham that modern unions are, and want to vote No, do you think Mr. Union next to me will be very happy with my "free choice"? Of course not? And what will Mr. Union do? The very thing the unions are accusing employers of doing: threaten me or even retaliate.

      Yeah, unions are wonderful so long as you work in the union itself sucking off the wages of others.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    67. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Skreems · · Score: 4, Interesting

      First, fast food jobs are NOT held only by high school kids. There are plenty of people who depend on that for their income, because they can't find other jobs.

      But my main question is, what authority has proclaimed that fast food "ought" to be a bargain? Is there some law somewhere that I'm not aware of? Some moral imperative? Just because something has been some way in the past doesn't mean it has to continue that way.

      --
      Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
      The Urban Hippie
    68. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Vancorps · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The real reason it costs so much less is that contributing to a 401k means that the money is removed from the regular revenue stream. The idiots at GM spent all the money that was supposed to be set aside for pensions which is why they are in so much trouble now.

      It turns out when it comes to pensions this was not an uncommon practice but obviously it requires continuous growth which isn't really something that a car company can rely on.

      401ks are far safer as employees and employers alike I believe have learned the lesson, plus 401ks are transferrable so if you lose your job after 28 years you don't risk your retirement.

    69. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've wondered about this. Why not just start hiring all people as independent contractors?

      Ah, grasshopper, you think you're the first one to think of this? Certainly would solve a lot of problems if companies could classify employees as contractors at will....

      ...except the IRS is wise to that game and will nail your ass to the wall. ;)

      Here's the IRS's Form that contains questions that serve as a method of determining whether a given relationship between employer/worker can be that of a contractor or not. And here is a more readable version.

      Basically, there's a list of 20 characteristics that distinguish actual contractors from employees that a shady company is trying to pass off as contractors. Things like who sets the hours, who provides the tools, where is the work done, how are they paid, who pays for business expenses, and so on.

      And no, I'm not a lawyer, but a company tried to hire me as a 'contractor' scientist one time, which was a nice way of telling me they wanted to hire me but provide no benefits and no security. My guess is that it wouldn't have stood up in court since they would have basically failed every step of that test linked to.

    70. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by dgatwood · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're very lucky. Teacher's unions, by contrast, seem to barely boost income by enough to cover the union dues. I've watched as they made very minimal progress on health insurance, which for part time people is nonexistent, so those folks don't get any real benefit from the union at all.

      All unions buy you is collective bargaining. If the employer can be bargained with, it's a win. If they can't, then it isn't a win. If they can be bargained with, then generally you would better off negotiating with your boss for a raise or extra time off or whatever, at least from what I've witnessed.

      By the time a union becomes so ingrained in the corporate culture that they've made things as seemingly utopian as the long list of things your union provides, they've also usually turned it into a work environment where nobody wants to work out of fear of union grievances for trying something new and attempting to advance in their careers, where there is no real potential for learning new skills, and where lots of dead weight employees are kept around because the union won't let the company cut their jobs, resulting in a poorly run company that barely gets by and eventually lays off a third of its workforce.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    71. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by porcupine8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My dad (in his 40s) was a Pizza Hut delivery driver for seven or eight years. He recently had to quit, because his pay hadn't increased to cover the rise in gas prices and so he was barely making any money. And tips have gone down in recent years because places have started charging delivery fees - which DON'T go to the driver (or possibly 25c of the dollar does), but the customers assume it does and so don't tip as much or at all. Plenty of the people he worked with are NOT high school students making extra money for the weekend - many of them were people with families who are using PH as a second job in the evenings to make ends meet.

      Delivery drivers have been working toward unionizing for a while now - I believe that there are now a few union Pizza Huts. Don't assume that these people are all teenagers who are trying to save up for a nicer car - many of them depended on this money and are now getting screwed over such that their jobs are barely profitable. Somewhat because of the public perceptions you've outlined in your post - not only that these jobs are only held by people who don't need the money, but also that you don't want your pizza to be a dollar more expensive, so the additional cost gets hidden in a "delivery fee" that winds up cutting into tips, so that even if they get a little of the increase it's more than balanced out by the lower tips. I'm not going to say for sure that they should be unionized, but I can see why they are dissatisfied and want to be treated better. They are fronting the money for their own gas, oil, and car repairs, while the pizza places don't care if their policies lead to lower tips.

      --
      Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
    72. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by DriedClexler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To be fair to GM and Ford, they have a generation or two of union costs on them that the new Toyota and Honda ventures do not.

      Let's put this in context. "A generation or two of union costs on them" does not just appear out of nowhere. The company and the union had to *agree* to it. The difference between the US and the Japanese union legacy costs is that the Japanese, by law, had to actually (heaven forbid!) fund the benefits in advance, not just expect superprofits to cover this completely expected cost when it comes due. The US companies did not. The money that they should logically have set aside to fund the benefits, was instead thrown off as bonuses and dividends.

      Btw, when I checked my stock trading account, I looked up GM bonds, and the ones that mature in just *three years* from now, are trading at ~28% yields -- I wish I could link it. That's a HUGE risk premium, and it's probably due to the -$40 billion book value of the company. Yes, *negative* 40 billion when you factor in legacy obligations.

      --
      Information theory is life. The rest is just the KL divergence.
    73. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by superdave80 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You forgot to add:

      *You industry driven into the ground (automotive, airlines, steel, etc.), since the company can no longer make hiring/firing/pay decisions based on economic or performance factors.

    74. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by jofer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Bullshit.

      Have you ever worked in fast food? If you're in a college town, what you said may be the case. For what it's worth, this applies mainly to privately-owned franchises. Corporate-owned stores are generally much better places to work, and do usually conform to labor laws.

      At least where I've worked (rural interstate exits and one genuine college town) fast food jobs are the sole source of income for the people working there. Generally, at least half of the people I worked with were supporting children, either as single parents or through child support payments. (Working 80+ hours a week is hard on marriages.) Minimum wage is a good job where I grew up. The 3 factories in the county all pay minimum wage. Fast food jobs pay better, but only because it's easier to get overtime.

      However, the working conditions are hell. Unless business is slow, you do not get anything other emergency bathroom breaks during an 8-hour shift. Meal breaks are only an option if you're working over 10-hour shifts, where there's a chance that someone will come in before another person leaves, giving you a chance to do something other than take or make orders. Being understaffed is one of the few absolutes in fast food.

      Conditions are generally worse for managers, as they don't have the right (literally, you sign it away) to say no if they're asked to come in or work extra at any time. Managers do not get breaks of any sort unless things are slow. If you're a salaried manager, you don't get paid for _any_ time you work over 40 hours, and you're _always_ required to work 60-100 hour weeks. One of our store managers tallied it up over a 6 month period and realized he was making $3.45 an hour if time-and-a-half overtime was taken into account. (Mininum wage was $4.75 at the time)

      To give you an example, a friend of mine at Subway (I worked at McD's at the time) had managed to get 4 days off over new-years to go on a trip with her kids. They were 100 miles away when she was called into work. She worked 36 hours straight with only 4 bathroom breaks and one 5 minute meal break. She went home for 4 hours, came back and worked a 24 hour shift. If she had refused, she would have been fired after the holiday rush. There aren't any other jobs in the area. Any job is better than none, and the store owner (not manager) knows it.

      Anyway, I'm ranting, obviously. Believe it or not, I wasn't exaggerating much. I got lucky and was able to go to college and I'm now in grad school, so I really can't complain.

      My point is that fast-food and other minimum wage jobs are places where unions are desperately needed. Local business owners will not comply with labor laws of any sort, and state agencies will not enforce them. Or at least that's been my experience, anyway.

    75. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by HungryHobo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      option 4:
      Pay them a decent wage by the local standards,nothing amazing but enough that they live comfortably and can send their kids to school.
      Keep some decent safety standards in the factory even if the local government is too fucked up to have laws on workplace safety.
      End up with a product that's a few percent more expensive but still competetive.
      Get decent stock options and bonuses
      Keep your soul.

    76. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      True, I love how Obama's people keep ignoring the fact that the lower capital gains tax has actually increased capital gains revenues. I kinda hope Obama gets elected so we can see how he isn't any different than any other politician.

    77. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Shotgun · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Unions will negotiate a "quota" for each job. I worked in a union shop, and was moved into another persons position for a day. The job was to program EPROMs (remember those?). The quota was obviously set when it was done using a slow, single chip programmer, as the quota was about 2 per hour. The hardware did 16 at a time in less than 2 minutes. Unions don't like workers to bust the quota. I had to run around and look for a corner to hide in for most of the day.

      That is just ONE of the specific ways that unions add overhead. I could list many more:

      - 'senior' employees being promoted over 'experienced' ones.

      - job division. Person A can't pick up a wrench (it's a mechanics job). Person B can't flip a switch (it's the electrician's job). Neither can turn on the water (it's the plumber's job).

      - I had an engineer come to me one day and ask that I take a box to the other building. I put the empty box on a cart and start down the hall with it. He walked beside me. When I asked what the hell he was doing, he said that he had to go there anyway. !!!???!!! He wasn't allowed to push a cart with an empty box on it. That was a UNION job.

      After a while, it just gets boring listing all the ways that a union can fubar a company.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    78. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by Shotgun · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Congratulations. You've just iterated why your children's jobs are moving offshore. Enjoy your retirement.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    79. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by comp.sci · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The idea behind minimum wage is that that's the minimum price of a person working for one hour and doesn't depend on what work they do. Why is the work of a high-school student or college kid worth less when compared to other relatively unskilled labor?

    80. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by ksheff · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To be fair to GM and Ford, they have a generation or two of union costs on them that the new Toyota and Honda ventures do not.

      Yep. Continuing generous benefits for retirees, the "job bank", and other costs still pile on the balance sheet even though plants are being closed. I'm not sure if it has been reached yet or not, but at some point they are going to be paying more to people that used to work for them than to those that are currently working for them. This insanity is going to end someday. Hopefully it won't be due to the companies going out of business.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    81. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by CowTipperGore · · Score: 2, Informative

      The real reason it costs so much less is that contributing to a 401k means that the money is removed from the regular revenue stream.

      Pension payments and 401K payments are practically no different. A company that skimps on its pension fund also can find ways to delay their matching payments to 401K plans. The difference that pension plans include unknown costs in the future whereas a 401K has much more defined costs for the company.

      The idiots at GM spent all the money that was supposed to be set aside for pensions which is why they are in so much trouble now.

      You speak from ignorance. The idiots at GM committed entirely too much of their revenue to pensions, which left them with few options for growth. In the past 15 years, GM spent over $100 billion dollars on pension and retiree health care costs. GM did fall behind in payments earlier this decade but has tried to make up the difference the past few years, cash starving the business even further. This situation was created by the shortsightedness of the company and union leadership of the 50s and 60s.

      401ks are far safer as employees and employers alike I believe have learned the lesson, plus 401ks are transferrable so if you lose your job after 28 years you don't risk your retirement.

      401Ks offer lower benefit levels and are only as safe as your investment choices, the stability of your portfolio management company, and the national economy. However, I do agree that they are, generally, a better option for both sides in the long term simply because all of the company's retiree costs are paid for along the way.

    82. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by RobinH · · Score: 2, Informative

      The net effect of the exploitation for us, from a purely monetary standpoint, is that money that was circulating in our country is now circulating in another country, making our country poorer.

      This is simply not true. If you'd taken even a first year macro-economics course, you'd realize that in order for us to buy goods from China, the importer has to sell our currency to purchase Chinese currency. In doing so, someone out there has to purchase our currency from him, and the general reasons for doing that is to purchase something we export or to make an investment in our economy. The fact is that Chinese money circulates in China and our money (with a couple exceptions) circulates in our country.

      For an example, consider this scenario. I am Canadian and I live in Canada. All of my living expenses are paid in Canadian Dollars (mortgage, car payment, utilities, food, etc.). However, for about 5 years I worked for a US company and was paid in US dollars. You could consider me an exporter of engineering services. My employer had to sell my services to customers in US dollars and pay all of his expenses (including my salary) in US dollars. Once those US dollars were in my US bank account, I still couldn't use them directly in Canada (you have to ignore the case that some Canadian restaurants near the border might accept US dollars because they still have to pay all their expenses in Canadian, so at some point the money has to be exchanged).

      So every two weeks I'd phone up my bank and sell almost all of my US currency for Canadian currency and have it transferred to my Canadian account in Canada. But the fact is that those US dollars still existed. For a short time the bank owned them (they keep a reserve of both currencies). Then, by putting that small amount of money on the currency trading market, the pool of US dollars was increased ever-so-slightly and the pool of Canadian currency was decreased by the same amount. In real terms, perhaps the exchange rate changed by 0.000001% or something. Ultimately, the supply of US dollars on the market went up, and the supply of Canadian dollars went down.

      Somewhere out there people make business decisions about what country to buy their stuff from based on the exchange rate and relative prices. Those US dollars I put on the market were then purchased by someone who had another currency and most likely wanted to purchase something from the US. Perhaps it was the GM dealership in Canada that I purchased my vehicle from (the VIN number starts with a 1 so I know it was manufactured in the US). Somehow GM had to take my Canadian dollars that I paid for the vehicle and sell some of them for US dollars to pay the expenses at the plant where it was built.

      If you don't think it has an effect, consider this... back in 2001 when I started working for a US company, I was exchanging every US dollar for 1.6 Canadian dollars, and at the time, given relative salaries, etc., it made a lot of sense for me to do it. Now the exchange rate is near 1 to 1. That changes my economic incentives drastically. The market was pushing Americans to purchase goods and services externally back in 2001, but now you can see lines of Canadians heading to the US to shop every weekend because the market is pushing Canadians to buy from the US. In a free currency market, trade will tend to balance. (Not that the Chinese currency market is free by any means.)

      Consider the opposite. Let's say that China keeps selling crazy amounts of stuff to the US without buying anything in return. The Chinese exporter has to sell the US dollars that the Americans paid with and buy Chinese Yuan (sp?) to pay the expenses of the plant. Over time this will decrease the amount of Yuan available and increase the amount of US dollars available on the market. This can't continue for long until the Yuan is so scarce and the US dollar is so available that the exchange rate swings wildly to the point where it doesn't make sense for (a) Americans to continue purchasing Chinese products or (b) Chinese not to purchase American products.

      This is pretty basic economics.

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    83. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by nasor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Indeed. The average [i]starting[/i] pay for a longshorman is $25/hour, with a 40 hour work week. This is for a job that basically requires no skills or education. It always amuses me when IT people talk about how they would hate to be unionized, then go on to work a 50+ hour week for pathetic pay at a job that actually requires skills and education.

    84. Re:No, *THESE* are slaves by jayratch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ahh unions.

      It is true that the unions historically are responsible for many of the better labor conditions in the US.

      In an amusing sidestep, they are also therefore responsible for the massive overseas outsourcing.

      Simply: due to the unions, the cost of labor in the US skyrocketed. Increased by a factor of 20 in less than a few decades. This got the corporate heads churning as to how they could get the labor costs back down.

      Enter China and most of the "developing" world. No unions, few labor laws, Wild Wild West. Cheaper labor by far, and therefore that's where the labor is being purchased. Humanity as a commodity.

      So some would argue that this is evidence that the unions are harmful, because in the end they just cost us all our jobs. In fact the reverse is true; the problem is not the unions but the inequity thereof internationally. The next necessary step is to bring the union concept to the margins where it is needed most. First, bring it to the laborers being exploited by predominantly American corporations, whatever countries they are in. Organize them, introduce the idea of supply control (strikes etc, where the "commodity" that is human capital establishes a voice for itself, rather than allowing themselves to be treated as cattle) and allow the cost of labor to rise. Not to rise beyond reason but to realign with reason.

      One of the key causal factors of the world's economic problems- and lets face it, economics are at the root of most of the world's other problems (see UN MDGs)- is the inequity between value, price, and cost. For instance, oil costs less than US$27 on average to produce and ship per barrel, yet the world price is set above $140. Capital costs for a 2000 square foot house are barely six figure if well built, yet they go for quadruple that in many American suburbs. And all individuals living in a major American city require something like $15,000 annually to "survive" yet the minimum pay is something like 2/3 of that.

      The establishment is supported by ingenious social concepts, ingrained as religion. It is considered not merely acceptable but *right* that the individual at the top of a company makes more than the 500 individuals at the bottom combined. Because one person is *worth* 500 times more than another? My numbers are examples from the extreme but should they exist at all? And that's only looking at same-country employees. What does the chairman of Wal-Mart make in comparison to his average factory worker in China? Quite a disparity.

      Unions help to level this playing field. The basic problem that causes the huge disparity in wealth distribution is power distribution. As such, peasants have no power almost by definition. But they do have a hidden power against the elites: need. Individually a peasant is powerless; stop working, and you will be disposed of and replaced. But in quantity, in unity, you cannot be disposed of, because the ruler would destroy himself in the process. What a union does is it organizes the coordination of power plays by the little guys. Collective bargaining is necessary because individual bargaining is impossible.

      In my company, certain people are represented by the union while others are not. Generally the split is at management regardless of department. Our tech workers and sales team are part of the same union. Incidentally, our competitors techs are in the union with us, though their sales team is not. I briefly worked for the competitors sales team- and quickly switched back. The union helps keep our pay satisfactory, helps keep us from being fired at random, minimizes the fluctuations in our commission structure, and is currently battling along with seemingly every other union to keep our health benefits. I make about US$60k a year, so I would say I'm in a slightly higher labor caste than the typical call center worker. Why shouldn't they be represented by a union?

      The simple pragmatic answer is that, in today's global economy, if the cost of running a US ca

  3. They should be insanely grateful by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 2, Funny

    For the experience!

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
  4. News... by maztuhblastah · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know for all the flak we give the traditional media, at least they don't have headlines like this.

    Not properly dispensing overtime pay is not the same thing as slavery, and the disconnect between the inflammatory headline and TFA is appalling.

    On a lighter note, the CAPTCHA for me is unionize.

    1. Re:News... by ccguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not properly dispensing overtime pay is not the same thing as slavery,

      Yours is one of many posts saying the same thing (and getting +5 insightful).

      Why are you guys focusing on bashing the headline instead on the actual problem, which is that highly skilled people are working over time for nothing?

      This IS a serious problem because,
      - It is so common in the industry that there aren't lots of alternatives.
      - The more they work the more others (even in other countries) are forced to work.
      - Quitting is not a serious option unless you are rich and work for sport.

    2. Re:News... by nick.ian.k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why are you guys focusing on bashing the headline instead on the actual problem, which is that highly skilled people are working over time for nothing?

      I'll save everyone the trouble - here's your contrarian dickhead answers in advance.

      This IS a serious problem because,

      - It is so common in the industry that there aren't lots of alternatives.

      "Nonsense. If they don't like it, they have the choice of working somewhere else where they find policy more agreeable!"

      - The more they work the more others (even in other countries) are forced to work.

      "They, too, have the choice of working somewhere else, and are not!"

      - Quitting is not a serious option unless you are rich and work for sport.

      "It's their choice to stay alive!"

      (Seriously, I fail to see how anyone can honestly disagree with your concise summary of broad consequences of such actions. Well done.)

    3. Re:News... by maztuhblastah · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why are you guys focusing on bashing the headline instead on the actual problem, which is that highly skilled people are working over time for nothing?

      Two reasons:

      1. If you believe that this is a serious issue that needs people's understanding, attention, and focus, then I'm sure you don't want to risk turning people off to your message because you published a headline rife with hyperbole. Using a reasonable headline will make sure you're taken seriously, and not discarded as some "loon".
      2. The workers choose to work there. I'm not arguing that what Apple did is legal (I know far to little about labor laws to comment one way or another on TFA), but I can't help but think that it's not "slavery" or "abuse" if the workers have the option of quitting and moving on to greener pastures.
    4. Re:News... by Alpha830RulZ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      instead on the actual problem, which is that highly skilled people are working over time for nothing

      Let's start by convincing me that this is a problem. These highly skilled people are also highly paid. Overtime pay is important, I will assert, because low paid people deserve a fair wage for their time.

      A software developer who makes a $90k salary doesn't quite fit the description. $90k is about $45/hour, if you work 40 hour weeks, and about $34 an hour if you average 50 hour weeks. $34 an hour is hardly starvation money. Whether this is a fair wage for their time is a matter of negotiation between the employee and the employer, in my opinion.

      The lack of overtime compensation is not forcing people into poverty, and it's not even abuse. It's apparently a condition of the employment at Apple, that some people don't like. Fair enough - find another job that doesn't demand that level of work.

      The right way to state this is that highly paid people are being tasked with work that takes more than 40 hours a week. They are complaining about that, and trying to use the government to renegotiate their salary. I suggest that they go move to France, where the government will help them do so. In the US, I'll be surprised if they succeed, because the laws in most states are pretty clear that professional work is generally excluded from requirements for overtime pay. Professional work is usually defined as that which requires a lengthy period of study to attain, such as accounting, medicine, and engineering.

      Personally, I am a little disgusted with the whining attitude of the gen x'rs. I have worked hours over my career that make these claims look paltry by comparison. The result, over time, was that I advanced in my career, and made some significant money when our company went public. My parents did the same. My grandfather worked his ass off on a farm, and was dirt poor. The chinese are working their asses off for $50 a month.

      If you all want civil service work conditions, go get a job working for the post office, and see how much fun that is. Develoment is hard, and to make a business of it sometimes means stretching your self. Toughen up and grow a sack. Or understand that you are relegating yourself to the group of workers that your managers will look at as being solely interested in what's in it for you, and therefore placing yourself on the list of those to jettison whenever cuts need to be made.

      --
      I was taught to respect my elders. The trouble is, it's getting harder and harder to find some.
    5. Re:News... by Dragoness+Eclectic · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So when management violates the law one should just "toughen up and grow a sack"?

      Hmm, not coming down on abuse of the law and employee's rights sounds more like cowardice than toughness. There's a big difference between laziness and not allowing some asshole to take advantage of you; until you learn that difference, assholes will be able to take advantage of you by pushing your "work ethic" buttons.

      "What? You don't want to work 80 hours a week without compensation? You're lazy/not a team player/want the benefits without putting in the work..."

      Yeah, I've heard that spiel before. I bet we all have. It's a scam, a hard-sell tactic to keep you from realizing they are taking advantage of you. My answer to "mandatory unpaid overtime" that I can't switch jobs to get away from just yet is the same one the Soviet subjects had: "You pretend to pay me, I'll pretend to work". You get what you pay for, and that includes employers.

      --
      ---dragoness
  5. Slaves, eh? by qoncept · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe these people need to talk with someone who has actually been enslaved before they claim they were treated the same way. They should be compensated appropriately for their time, but the shock value of using the term "slave" is pretty ridiculous.

    --
    Whale
    1. Re:Slaves, eh? by korbin_dallas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Damn right, they are 'Resources' not Slaves.

      --
      They Live, We Sleep
    2. Re:Slaves, eh? by iocat · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Give me a break. These people need to grow up. Like many other people, I moved to California from an arguably prettier, milder, easier-to-live-in state with a way better education system and a far lower cost of living. I work like a dog. Why? BECAUSE I LOVE WORKING FOR A TECHNOLOGY COMPANY. People bitching because they work long hours in tech should try working 45 years, 7 -3 at a fucking factory in the midwest and see how their quality of life compares. Or even worse, working at some hourly service job in the Southeast.

      I don't care what you do, whether its work in the cafe or do QA or CS or clean the fucking toilets, there's probably about 10,000 people across the country who'd happily switch places with each of the malcontents at Apple, for a chance to work at such a stable, growing, employee-friendly company.

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    3. Re:Slaves, eh? by clone53421 · · Score: 3, Informative

      If it isn't racist, it isn't slavery? That's the stupidest argument I ever heard. There might be good reasons to argue that it isn't slavery, but you've failed to find one of them.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    4. Re:Slaves, eh? by indifferent+children · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And for people complaining about 'confiscatory' taxes: raise the highest tax rate to 80%, and listen to people making over $2M/yr scream. I could find tens of millions of Americans who would love to make $2M/yr, even if 80% of it will be taken in taxes. Does that mean that you would endorse an 80% income tax rate for the highest bracket? Should the upper-income people stop bitching about higher tax rates, just because I can find people who would love to trade places with them?

      --
      Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it. --Mark Twain
    5. Re:Slaves, eh? by BobMcD · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe these people need to talk with someone who has actually been enslaved before they claim they were treated the same way.

      Where would you propose to find one of those in the modern era? Especially in a western culture where things might begin to equate?

      I dearly hope you're not implying that they should consult a blood relative of someone who used to be a slave in the 1860's for insight into what it was really like...

    6. Re:Slaves, eh? by clone53421 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Ah, I see, now I'm a racist too. Excellent comeback.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  6. Jobs by Daniel+Weis · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's their Jobs.

  7. Re:Slashdotted by joelwest · · Score: 2, Funny

    Actually the page was not available 30 minutes ago..not that I am implying the someone else would want that page taken down... Ok yes I am implying it strongly!

  8. He quit. by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nobody hunted him down and made him return to the job; he's not a slave, QED.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  9. Help! Help! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm being repressed!

    1. Re:Help! Help! by repvik · · Score: 2, Funny

      Come and see the violence inherent in the (moderator)system!

  10. Slavery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    'Slavery' seems like far too extreme of a word the 'indentured servitude' is slightly less inaccurate. And concerning 'servitude' the 13th amendment only prohibits "involuntary servitude". These people can quit if they would like.

  11. Queue the jokes, and something serious... by apathy+maybe · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've already seen a "joke" about cultists (it was crap, I'm expecting better), any more?

    But yeah, a random comment, capitalism sucks.

    Seriously, people often don't have a real choice (the freedom to starve...) when it comes to signing contracts, especially in countries (such as the USA) where significant workers rights aren't enshrined in law.

    In this case, it appears that the workers signed contracts which said that they wouldn't get paid an hourly rate, which means that they don't get overtime. Which means (at least in this case), that they can get over worked for nothing.

    And that is a problem (I've heard it is a very big problem in Japan generally).

    Basically (and I'm taking off my anarchist hat for a minute), workers rights do require regulation in a capitalist economy, otherwise they get screwed.

    --
    I wank in the shower.
    1. Re:Queue the jokes, and something serious... by ari_j · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The US and, in particular, California are a far cry from not having any significant workers' rights enshrined in law. Also, none of these people were above working elsewhere if the pay they got at Apple was really that awful for the hours they were putting in. Slavery and indentured servitude take away that choice. Capitalism doesn't suck. People bitching about their dream job not paying overtime sucks.

    2. Re:Queue the jokes, and something serious... by Notquitecajun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Communism sucks worse. It's called working on a salary - the expectation is to do the job, and get paid for doing the job. Yeah, working for a big corporation can suck at times because to really get ahead there you have to do OYOT stuff, but that's something that society's most productive - and essential - members will ALWAYS do.

      That being said, state law typically trumps any/all contract law - if the contract signed was illegal, then you're not held to it.

      I don't get paid for showing up to work per hour. I get paid to work and do a job.

      We're in America - we're free to fail, and I think that people don't like that sometimes - they felt they are owed for simply trying. You're not. Hence the complaints about stupid stuff like this where people FEEL "trapped" when they're not in it as much as they think they are. Successful people don't whine about their circumstances - they go out and try to change them.

    3. Re:Queue the jokes, and something serious... by Nursie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Successful people don't whine about their circumstances - they go out and try to change them."

      And this is why the US races to the bottom on workers rights and pay.

      There's more to life than work, and being coerced into working hundreds of extra hours a month because you don't have much choice (everywhere does it) and "that's what you do if you want to succeed". It's a very quick way to have an overworked and underpaid population with all the money staying at the top.

      Europe manages to be competitive with the US and yet we work less hours and (due to exchange rates) usually get paid more.

      Successful countries don't need a slave economy.

    4. Re:Queue the jokes, and something serious... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "We're in America - we're free to fail"

      If you're a little guy, sure. But if you're a company that's "too big to fail", like Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bear Stearns, etc, then the socialism kicks in and you get bailed out.

    5. Re:Queue the jokes, and something serious... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You know, there's a hell of a lot of room between capitalism and communism. I'm sitting there quite comfortably.

    6. Re:Queue the jokes, and something serious... by Real1tyCzech · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OK. I lol'ed.

      Workers rights?

      And then you follow it up with the fact that *they* signed contracts?

      Perhaps they shouldn't have?

      Or...and this is the kicker, perhaps they should realize that in a global market, they're *still* making more than most folks doing the same type of work and count themselves as lucky to even *have* a contract?

      Our company doesn't have such things. Hire and fire @ will. Perhaps they'd prefer that?

      I know, let's sue apple so they have a good excuse to even further outsource their workforce and employ *no* US citizens. Then they could lower prices, improve quality, *and* still make more money.

      The problem isn't Apple. The problem is the US citizen's overblown sense of "self-worth" and "entitlement".

    7. Re:Queue the jokes, and something serious... by Nursie · · Score: 5, Informative

      "They can't fire you for not working overtime. "

      Yes, yes they can, they can fire you without even giving a reason in any of the "at will" states.

    8. Re:Queue the jokes, and something serious... by silentcoder · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Really ? According to an article I read (and please correct me if I'm wrong) the US is the ONLY industrialized nation where annual leave is not a legal requirement. Heck, most DEVELOPING countries have it as a requirement. 14 days a year in South Africa (and if you don't use them all, they have to pay you for it), a full month in Brazil, 2 months in Germany.
      And the grand irony - legally protected annual leave has been proven to INCREASE corporate productivity (as much as any economic idea is ever proven anyways).

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    9. Re:Queue the jokes, and something serious... by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You are correct: all of Europe put together is competitive with the American economy. That's pretty impressive, given that they're pulling a lot of dead weight (cough, France).

      In terms of actual efficiency, however, we're beating the crap out of you, and the reason why is because your labor laws are too business unfriendly. Competition is good for the market. If workers are willing to work for the wage, what's the problem? Why artificially raise the bar for businesses?

      I'm not feeling a lot of sympathy for people working at Apple. Work there for a few years, and you can get a job anywhere just on the cache`.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    10. Re:Queue the jokes, and something serious... by Nursie · · Score: 3, Funny

      Eh no, sorry bub, we're not just leeches on the great ol' US.

      We're actually very similar to the US - we live on debt and cheap shit from China.

    11. Re:Queue the jokes, and something serious... by Graywolf · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's just 24 working days (minimum) in Germany.

    12. Re:Queue the jokes, and something serious... by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If annual leave actually increases corporate productivity, then it will be adopted by corporations operating in a capitalist market. It's that simple. What we do have in the USA is the freedom to decide that between employer and employee, as well as the freedom to experiment with whether and how much paid vacation affects productivity. You can't prove that it increases productivity because you don't have any way to experiment.

      That's such a ridiculous fallacy. It turns out the world isn't a perfect capitalist market. That would require perfect knowledge, and it turns out that no one has that. People who make these decisions make them for their own benefit, are terrified of experimenting in a way that could upset the things that are already working, and usually abandon any new ideas the moment any remotely potential problem arises.

      The GP points at some of the only evidence we do have, which comes from the powerhouse European economy's generous paid leave. Does that prove anything? No. It lets us make some educated guesses, though, and to think that capitalism means that the best solution will always be adopted and become widespread is a great mistake. At best, capitalism in practice is a series of educated guesses that often leads down very unproductive roads.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
  12. Overexaggerate Much? by rsmith-mac · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Indentured Servitude: An indentured servant is a form of debt bondage worker, in which the indentured individual is intentionally, unethically and illegally deprived of their human rights, their civil rights and their personal freedom and liberty.

    Unfortunately TFA is Slashdotted right now so I can't read all of the details, but if the summary is anything to go by, I really, really doubt Apple was forcing these guys to work due to debt and/or was holding them captive. What they did do was make their workers work OT without paying them correctly, which is an inexcusably naughty practice, but it's hardly indentured servitude, slavery, or any other form of bondage.

    Furthermore this shit is fairly common, Apple isn't the first company or the last company to stiff their employees on OT. That doesn't make it right and certainly knocks Apple down a few pegs in my own eyes, but get some perspective here people.

    1. Re:Overexaggerate Much? by damburger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Debt bondage? I wonder if not being able to quit your job because you need to make mortgage payments counts? Maybe people will look back on our era of a credit driven economy and consider us all bloody indentured.

      (Incidentally, NEO isn't outside the Earth gravitational field. Its just that in orbit everything is falling at the same rate and thus appears to be relatively weightless)

      --
      If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    2. Re:Overexaggerate Much? by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2

      CmdrTaco doesn't write the summaries. He just writes the "from the clever inside joke dept." part. In this particular case, SwiftyNifty wrote the summary.

      I bet he whips SwiftyNifty if he doesn't write an appropriately trolling summary mentioning slavery too.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  13. Cry me a river by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Lead plaintiff David Walsh was employed by Apple as a network engineer from 1995 until 2007. His complaint says he was often required to work more than 40 hours per week, miss meals, and spend his evenings and even entire weekends on call without any overtime pay or meal compensation. He fielded technical support calls that often came after 11 pm."

    Sounds like a typical work week for me. I don't get overtime pay or meal compensation either. And I don't get a free iPod or iPhone as a Christmas gift.

    1. Re:Cry me a river by sesshomaru · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Well, you're a sucker then. (Either that or you are making so much money you expect to retire early.) Frankly I'm all for this suit, but actually I don't think anyone has to work that kind of job... but maybe people want to in order to work for a "sexy" company like Apple.

      .

      Don't misunderstand, I think it is very macho of you to give your labor away for free. Being taken advantage of by your bosses is the best way to prove that you are an IT god, after all. I'm sure that since you've taken care of your company in this way, they'll take care of you. Even if shipping your job someplace else or just eliminating it makes financial sense, I'm sure you'll be fine. After all, after all the loyalty and dedication you've shown, they'd never do that to you, would they?

      Incidentally, iPods/iPhones? Worthless consumer junk, give me the cash not the overpriced trinket.

      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
    2. Re:Cry me a river by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2, Informative

      Or they need to understand labor laws. Regardless of whether you are salaried or hourly, employers must pay you overtime if you are non-management. This does vary by state, but it's pretty common across the board in the US. No contract can supersede the law; that part of the contract becomes null and void.

      Note that a lot of non-management people are classified as management to get around this... but this classification can be overturned by the court, and often is when tested.

      Your state laws may vary... but you should be aware of the law, and what your rights are. If you don't feel it's a big deal, and don't want to push, that's fine... but I know several people (myself included) who have used this to justify an above-average salary adjustment at review time.

      Most employers are aware of the law, and will follow it if pressed. The punitive damages for blatantly ignoring the law, the cost of replacing an employee, all put it in the employee's favor should things come to a head.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  14. Re:Slashdotted by SimonGhent · · Score: 2, Funny

    Christ.. This quickly??!.. Server not available

    It never ceases to amaze me that any sites get slashdotted considering how obvious it is that very few posters ever RTFA, let alone the previous comments to a story...

    In this case I guess it's all the /. Apple fanboyz keeping the site down. It's a conspiracy, you mark my words.

    --
    simon
  15. My Wife's A Teacher by Illbay · · Score: 5, Insightful

    She and her colleagues have "X" number of contract days for which they must report to work.

    However of late, the practice has begun of additional "nonmandatory" meetings, training sessions, and general workdays. You know, "for the children." This has grown to the point where she is probably present "at work" during about 12 to 15 days of her summer vacation. None of this time is compensated in any way; in fact, with gasoline costs as they are, you may readily say SHE is paying for this privilege.

    Oh, it's "not mandatory," but it is "expected" by the administrators, who like to boast to their peers about the amount of "donated time" they're getting out of their teachers. "Failure to cooperate" can lead to subtle retaliation.

    My point is that this isn't "slavery" but it is d*mned inconsiderate. If you want to climb the "ladder of success," don't do it on the backs of your "underlings."

    --
    Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.
    1. Re:My Wife's A Teacher by kidgenius · · Score: 3, Informative

      Um, speaking as someone whose mother is a teacher, sister is a teacher, and sister-in-law is a teacher, you are paid for your summer break. You usually will receive a large check at the beginning of the summer break to cover you for the summer. So, you are being paid, just like if you were in school. So what if you have to attend some trainings, etc. You have already been compensated at the beginning of the summer. She is not paying for the privilege, she was paid previously. That money is basically given with the assumption that through the summer, you will be creating lesson plans and such for the next year. Going to a training fits into that scope. If you worry about paying for gas and everything, look into taking that as a deduction/credit on your taxes at the current rate of ~$0.50/mile. I know that as an engineer, when I have had to travel to facilities other than the one I have a desk at, I get reimbursed by the government. Now, don't think I am disparaging teachers. I'm not. They usually are at the schools for an hour an a half before class, and usually 2 after, in addition to taking work home like grading papers, tests, etc. Add to that, that they have to deal with a bunch of kids that usually don't want to listen to them, you get a situation where teachers are not compensated enough in my eyes.

    2. Re:My Wife's A Teacher by punkr0x · · Score: 2, Funny

      She works 12 days during the summer you say? That really is an injustice, I can't believe this Apple story is getting all the attention and noone is talking about the teachers!

    3. Re:My Wife's A Teacher by Farmer+Crack-Ass · · Score: 5, Informative

      Speaking as someone who actually works at a school district, you either misunderstand what that money represents, or you know some pretty damned lucky teachers. The district I work at (and I've heard teachers from other places describe it this way as well) gives you two options: 1) Full pay for nine months. It's up to you to either budget responsibly or find a summer job to hold you over for those summer months. 2) Average out your salary over twelve months - you get the same amount of money, but some of it is held during the school months so that you can continue to receive a steady paycheck over the summer. Either way, the teachers are only contracted for the days they work in the school year - summer isn't considered paid work or paid vacation. Now, if things are different in your district, that's fine - just remember that different places and people will have different perspectives.

  16. Is everyone a freakin slave these days? by MosesJones · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Good god it appears to be the phrase of the year "We are just modern slaves". Top of the shop of abuse of the term is Sepp "I'm a nutter" Blatter who in reference to someone who is paid about $300,000 A WEEK said that it was just like modern slavery.

    These people aren't slaves because.... THEY COULD QUIT. It might be tough, it might be hard, but either quit and get another job or work out a constructive way of fixing it.

    Don't compare it to the physical ownership of another human being and the sort of destruction of human rights that entails.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
  17. IDE chain gang by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 5, Funny

    Apple employees should just switch which pins are connected via the jumper. It's clearly labeled on the top of the drive.

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  18. Such Insensitivity by segedunum · · Score: 5, Funny

    Apple made it perfectly clear in their contracts that they would be compensated by merely getting excited about the thought of working near the place where such secret and beautiful products are created. Even just working for Apple should be compensation enough. Hell, you should be able to get your date off merely by telling her you work for Apple.

    I take it these people didn't get the memo. Do these people not know that?

  19. The Apple Employee by Rie+Beam · · Score: 5, Funny

    It Just Works.(TM)

  20. pathetic by Lord+Ender · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Equating earning $100k and working in an air conditioned office longer than you expected with SLAVERY disparages the memories of those who were whipped to near death while working in fields, and paid nothing.

    I think the court should order those workers to work on plantations without pay for a while, then reconsider their use of the word "slavery."

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
    1. Re:pathetic by Ukab+the+Great · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Point taken, people are exaggerating when they talk about slavery. Perhaps sharecropping would be a more adequate analogy.

      Also, keep in mind that $100k in Silicon Valley ain't much in an area where the average small house is $700k and poverty level is below $50k.

    2. Re:pathetic by TheLostSamurai · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, living on only $100,000 a year in Silicon Valley is simply impossible. Except of course for the other 80 percent of the population not making $100,000 a year.

      --
      I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.
  21. Delicious by Rie+Beam · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Coke Cola introduced a new, delicious Lime-twisted beverage today, creating a Holocaust of flavor formerly unknown to this world until today. The lines of people at convenience stores remind one of cattle awaiting an unknown fate, only these cattle were people, and the fate a tasty, carbonated beverage."

  22. 80 hours a week... by trrwilson · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...and not loving it.

  23. Obligatory Simpsons reference by Freeside1 · · Score: 3, Funny
  24. Just until the suite is resolved,, by japhering · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just wait until they win their suit..Apple will pay the court required payments.. then convert all those employee to an hourly status...at a base pay cut design to make it so that all the overtime is required to make it back to what they were getting in salary in the first place.

    For the IBM employeesu in California that sued for the same thing.. the class won $56M and everyone in the class was reclassified as hourly at a 15% pay cut, because based on IBM's calculations that would keep the wage payments at the same level after the switch from salary to hourly. And oh by the way.. IBM applied the reclassification across all American employees in the same job category, but not the class action payments.

    1. Re:Just until the suite is resolved,, by faraway · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I work for a huge semiconductor company (4B revenue last year).

      The Engineering department is all Asians and more specifically, a lot of H-1B workers.

      When I got there I was surprised to find that the company culture and expectation was 10-12 hours a day at least, 6-7 days a week.

      I could come in at any time of the night, 3AM whatever, and there would be people there.

      The thing is, you have to join the group - these people are 'happy' to work these long hours, they're H-1B, and just happy to be in the US. And all of this on a salary.

      In the beginning I tried doing the 8 hr workday and people would give me nasty looks because I was 'leaving early'.

      I shot an email over to HR and cited CA labour law relating/specifically listing our job as a hourly non-exempt job.

      Calculating the amount of hours I was putting in and the amount of overtime I would get paid, I calculated around 55k missed wages in a year.

      Needless to say, within 3 months our group was called in and given a presentation by HR - something about 'the law changing recently' (bs). We were to be made hourly, we were to have at least a day a week where we have to not work, and a curfew of 10PM.

      Surprisingly, I was expecting them to cut wages like IBM did, but they didn't.

      I know one of my coworkers had previously put in 152 hours in two weeks. It seems that work is life for the Chinese coworkers I have. And if you don't keep up, you stand out.

  25. Re:the new neocon slashdot by argent · · Score: 4, Funny

    I remember when slashdot was full of smart people with a liberal philosophy

    I don't remember that. I remember a slashdot full of nerds... all the way down.

  26. Welcome to Corporate America by UID30 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... where, unless you are upper management, you are getting the shaft. Being a developer, I particularly like how (at my company anyway) our sales staff pulls down Director level salary and obscene commissions on the gross (NOT net) product they push out the door ... even when it means a loss for the company.

    I remember back years ago where there were a few movements to form programmers unions ... doomed to failure from the inception. Programmers don't need huge entrenched installations to do our work like, say, UAW workers do ... and since every cocky high school kid who has churned out "Hello World" in Visual Basic thinks they can do real development ... and the typical management position that developers are an easily replaced commodity.

    I dunno. I'm just old and jaded. Always do the best work you are capable of doing, and if you feel you deserve better compensation when your company is either unwilling (don't see you as a valuable asset) or unable (poor decisions have left them so fubar that they can't) then it is time to move on. Possibly more important ... if you are unhappy doing what you are doing, forget the compensation and move ASAP.

    Suing your own company for a perceived lack of compensation is the best way to build resentment and to nail the coffin shut on your future with that, or any other, company.

    --
    "Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." - Napoleon Bonaparte
  27. Re:Any mirrors - the site is /.'ed by rugatero · · Score: 3, Funny

    I would like to read the article.

    I'm sorry, could you rephrase that? I'm not sure I quite grasp what you mean.

    --
    This comment is for entertainment purposes only. Any similarity to real insight or information is purely coincidental.
  28. what a twit by buddyglass · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Apple employees aren't slaves. Or even indentured servants. The comparison is offensive given there is real slavery going on elsewhere in the world.

    Are they asked to work unreasonable hours and compensated unfairly? Maybe. But they can always quit and seek employment elsewhere. If all of Apple's talent just up and leaves, they'll either fail as a company or rectify their compensation strategy. Capitalism at work.

  29. Slaves by whisper_jeff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know that people love to throw around buzz words that illicit an immediate emotional response but I think people need to truly understand the power those words possess and recognize that, by using the word, they are not empowering their case. They are demonstrating a shocking lack of understanding of our world's history which immediately undermines their case as nothing more than the histrionics of a drama queen. Does this lawsuit have ground to stand on? Possibly. If Apple is treating their staff unfairly then a class action lawsuit is warranted. But, as soon as anyone associated with the case attached "slave" to their description of the situation, my immediate reaction because "attention whore seeking easy payday." If you're going to use an emotionally charged word, make certain it's relevant. In this case, it couldn't be less relevant if they tried. They may as well have simply likened Apple to Nazis while they were at it...

  30. There are enough real slaves in the world... by pagewalker · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Agreed--they should be compensated for their time, but they shouldn't be calling it slavery. Slavery is a massive problem. We have millions of people worldwide (including many in the US) who actually do live as slaves.

    The difference between not being allowed to take your meal breaks and being told you'll need to be raped until you've earned your way out of an $80,000 debt is... the difference between a mosquito bite and being impaled by a triceratops. Twice. Each day.

    Only it's harder, because after you've been a slave, people look at you differently, and you look at yourself differently. Sometimes your family won't have anything to do with you, and it's common to have major health problems or psychological problems because of it. And then there's the trick of trying to get back into society.

    River of Innocents is a good, accessible primer on the subject. The Wikipedia Human Trafficking page also has some info.

    --
    Thousands are enslaved every day. A River of In
  31. What would Stallman say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    He'd say, you don't need to get paid. I agree. Steve Jobs agrees. Where's the problem?

    1. Re:What would Stallman say? by lastchance_000 · · Score: 5, Informative

      My girlfriend used to work for AppleCare (in the call center). Here's what she said about it (from IM, so excuse the grammar/typing):

      well...your expected to check your company related email, stats, get your system booted, go aver any company alerts BEFORE you sign on. this requires most to come in early to do work related things. the catch is Apple doesn't pay you till you're signed on and your shift actually starts. Apple's argument is that you can do these other work related things between calls ... but that's difficult because calls come in constantly... and time in "idle" counts against you....

    2. Re:What would Stallman say? by cawpin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And that's a big point for the lawsuit. That is flat out illegal. You can't require somebody to do something for work and not pay them.

    3. Re:What would Stallman say? by TheQuantumShift · · Score: 5, Informative

      Was the call center actually Apple owned? Or was it one of the many "Teleservice" outsourcing companies? Either way, the described situation sounds exactly like standard call center practices. The sad part is most companies seem to think call center = help desk. You can have one or the other, but not both. A help desk costs more, but yields better results whereas a call center costs less and yields nothing but frustrated customers. Unfortunately most organizations seem unable to see past the bottom line of the next quarter.

      --

      Shift happens. Fire it up.
    4. Re:What would Stallman say? by rbannon · · Score: 5, Informative

      I've been teaching for twenty years now and I can attest to the fact that slave labor is rampant in education. Many are require to volunteer (work) for the good of the institution---and it's often a money-maker for the institution. Even with the world's strongest union, we're typically forced into slave labor. Just the other day my boss told me that we as teacher are going to have to increase our non-teaching workload by 40%. The number is nonsense, but it basically suggest that we're going to have to increase our workload.

      Anyway, the point being, even with a strong union you can't stop this from happening, so I am kind of surprised that people see this as unusual at Apple, everyone's doing it.

      I also see this as hitting the educated more than any other group.

    5. Re:What would Stallman say? by tcr · · Score: 5, Funny

      > calls come in constantly
       
      Hey, I thought "it just works..."??
      :-)

      --


      Information wants to be beer.
    6. Re:What would Stallman say? by ibmjones · · Score: 3, Informative

      My girlfriend used to work for AppleCare (in the call center). Here's what she said about it (from IM, so excuse the grammar/typing):

      well...your expected to check your company related email, stats, get your system booted, go aver any company alerts BEFORE you sign on. this requires most to come in early to do work related things. the catch is Apple doesn't pay you till you're signed on and your shift actually starts. Apple's argument is that you can do these other work related things between calls ... but that's difficult because calls come in constantly... and time in "idle" counts against you.

      That's actually the case with any call-center. It's not unique to Apple.

      Doesn't make it fair, though, IMO.

    7. Re:What would Stallman say? by lordofthechia · · Score: 5, Informative

      Man, if that's what they were doing they are screwed, from:

      http://portland.bizjournals.com/portland/stories/2003/11/24/daily21.html

      "T-Mobile said 20,546 workers at 13 call centers, including one in Salem, were required to perform "preparatory activities" prior to the beginning of their normal shifts. Such activities -- and any other work-related activity beyond 40 hours per week -- must be compensated under the Fair Labor Standards Act, according to an announcement."

      T-Mobile lost to the tune of 4.8 Million. Can we say precedence?

      --
      Georgia Tech, the leader in Chia(tm) technology.
    8. Re:What would Stallman say? by lpevey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Educators are typically salaried, no?

    9. Re:What would Stallman say? by electrictroy · · Score: 2, Informative

      I ALWAYS compensate myself for "unpaid" work.

      I start charging the minute I walk through the door, so if I'm expect to "check company related email, stats, get your system booted, go aver any company alerts BEFORE you sign on," Apple can forget that. I'll sign on FIRST and then go read that other crap. If I'm working, they will pay me.

      Same with teaching. Every hour I work, whether it's coaching afterschool or correcting homework at home, will get billed somewhere.

      Now some people say "Well you're salaried".

      Does not matter. If I end-up working 60 hours a week, my effective hourly rate is reduced to only $15. Might as well go get an easy-to-do factory job or sales job and get the same pay.

      --
      The government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid middle-class neighbors' wallets and give it to you.
    10. Re:What would Stallman say? by EgoWumpus · · Score: 5, Funny

      The sad part is most companies seem to think call center = help desk.

      Aha! There is your problem. It's: call center == help desk, otherwise your test will always return true; a self fulfilling test, if you will.

      --

      [Ego]out

    11. Re:What would Stallman say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've taught and I've worked in a factory. Its obvious you have never worked in a factory if you think that is the easy-to-do job. Standing over a press machine in an non-air conditioned building for 12 hours a day is not easy, even if it is mentally challenging.

        Also, factory jobs are not exactly easy to come by these days.

    12. Re:What would Stallman say? by chasisaac · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Does not matter. So are most computer programmers. Not to mention when I worked in a call center we were salaried and worked over 60 hours a week

      --
      -- A computer without Windoze is like a choclate cake without mustard
    13. Re:What would Stallman say? by KateMinola · · Score: 2, Informative

      The call center is an Apple owned call center near Sacramento,Ca. The employee's in question are payed hourly. They are also pressed to sell extended warranties and technical solutions as a means of covering the cost of the call center. Add to that the fact that their schedules are changed arbitrarily every eight to twelve weeks and not being able to account for unscheduled time off the phone could cost them their jobs. Fantastic products...but not the most pleasant place to work.

    14. Re:What would Stallman say? by mentaldrano · · Score: 5, Informative

      Other companies in the past have tried to get away with this and been slapped hard. The case Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co. was specifically decided in the employees favor on just this issue.

      The pottery company did not start paying the employees until after they had reached their workstations, put on their work clothes, cleaned and sharpened their tools. The court ruled that any activity performed exclusively for the benefit of the company counts as paid time, even walking to your workstation. Hence the name "portal-to-portal decision" - employees must be paid as soon as they walk in the door and don't stop until they walk out of it.

      I think Apple is probably in trouble here.

    15. Re:What would Stallman say? by kelnos · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, but this lawsuit is specifically about hourly employees.

      --
      Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
    16. Re:What would Stallman say? by ArsonSmith · · Score: 5, Funny

      You've obviously never worked in a call center. Often time it does just work. Problem is the user has no clue that a mouse is used by your hand not your foot.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    17. Re:What would Stallman say? by ishobo · · Score: 5, Informative

      Many programmers (especially interns and entry level) are non-exempt. I fail to see how a call center worker would be exempt from overtime rules.

      In California, most exempt workers operate under the administrative exemption. An employee is an exempt administrator if he/she regularly exercises discretion and independent judgment, performs under only general supervision, and is primarily engaged in duties that require the exercise of discretion and independent judgment. This means that in the course of day-to-day activities, the employee frequently compares and evaluates possible courses of conduct and, after considering various possibilities, acts or makes a decision. An employee who follows a prescribed procedure, or determines which procedure to follow, is not exercising independent judgment.

      While most if not all employees are required to exercise discretion in decision making, an exempt employee must be dealing with matters that are significant to the policies or operations of the business or its customers.

      --
      Slashdot - The great and glorious cluster fuck of Internet wisdom.
    18. Re:What would Stallman say? by khellendros1984 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In California, certain categories of IT workers (such as programmers and software engineers) are not allowed to be overtime-exempt employees. We're required to be hourly and be eligible for overtime to counteract exactly what it is that Apple is being accused of.

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    19. Re:What would Stallman say? by ishobo · · Score: 2, Informative

      California has the computer professional exemption. Most IT workers do not meet its requirements. A worker must perform one of these duties 50% of the time.

      • The application of systems analysis techniques and procedures including consulting with users to determine hardware, software, or system specifications.
      • The design, development, documentation, analysis, creation, testing, or modification of computer systems or programs, including prototypes, based on and related to user or system design specifications.
      • The documentation, testing, creation, or modification of computer programs related to the design of software or hardware for computer operating systems.

      And their salary must match the hourly rate of $36 begining Jan 2008. Simply earning $74,880 will not make you exempt. It will only make you exempt if you never work more than 40 hours in a week. As soon as you work 41 hours in a week, the exemption would fail, impacting your classification for the whole year while making you elegible for past overtime. If you worked 50 hours in any week, your employer would need to pay you a salary of $93,600 to safely keep you at the $36 per hour rate. For 60 hours it goes up to $112,320, 70 hours is $131,040, and 80 hours is $149,760.

      Prior to 2008, the hourly rate was $49.77: 40 hours = $103,522, 50 hours = $129,402, 60 hours = $155,282, 70 hours = $181,163, and 80 hours = $207,044. You have 4 years to claim past overtime.

      Employers in Calfornia must still track all hours worked by their exempt employees. I have never worked at a company that actually did this. They track the standard 8 hour day for benefits (PTO, sick, vacation) purposes, not the actual hours worked. Exempt employees need to keep a detailed work log because employers routinely abuse the exempt classifications. Employers pay salary because it is easy (and often cheaper).

      --
      Slashdot - The great and glorious cluster fuck of Internet wisdom.
    20. Re:What would Stallman say? by failedlogic · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is pretty much industry standard in call-centers. I mentioned this to my managers that I was against coming in early to start computer, read e-mails and sit at my desk for 10 - 15 minutes before I get paid. Add it up over the year and you're looking at an extra $2000. They said no and basically implied that if I didn't I would lose my job. Some of the employees didn't agree with my position and didn't see what was wrong with it until they did the math.

      Just to be clear. I've no problem doing the work or the overtime. Coming into work early is fine with me. But they never even offered - and would not even - boot the computers for the employees. In a sales position I made more than enough money that I didn't care. When it came to entry level work, where you don't work for much money and return a lot to the company - as with most call center jobs, its really taking advantage of the unfortunate.

    21. Re:What would Stallman say? by steveo777 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Completely illegal. I work for a health care business office and they tried to pull that crap on us, saying we must be logged into the system and into our first account within 3 minutes of clocking in. If we don't have time after swiping, come in early.

      I swiftly pointed out that practice to be illegal, and proceeded to time myself walking from the clock, to my workstation, booting my computer, loading Outlook (we are required to check for systems alerts before logging in) and even that took me almost 5 minutes. I hadn't even started our software. The max time between clocking and starting work went back to 10 minutes.

      Labor laws are VERY clear on this issue. They can require you to come prepared (dressed a certain way, or whatever), but they cannot require you do perform ANY work related tasks without pay. Heck, they can't even ask.

      --
      This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
    22. Re:What would Stallman say? by Renraku · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unfortunately most greedy managers sem unable to see past the bottom line of the next quarter.

      Fixed that for you.

      MOST of the time, what happens, is that the task of creating a call center comes down from up above, and is handed to a manager, or a manager is hired to head up the project. The manager evaluates his options, and is given a goal to meet. Rather than getting reasonably close to the goal, they decide to undercut the goal to make themselves look better. When they save the company an boatload of money, they're given bonuses, promoted, etc. Some companies automatically give bonuses if managers do well.

      The problem is that the effects are not usually immediate and strong enough to stop the manager from being patted on the back and given bonuses/promoted/etc. Its the people down the road that have to deal with all the fallout, and the company is just that much weaker for outsourcing to India for half the cost.

      Most CEOs are pretty savvy in the business world. You usually only hear about the ones that aren't.

      This kind of thing happens in jobs everywhere. Why would the contractor use better quality materials on your house when they can use things they bought at half price? As long as they're gone it doesn't matter if it lasts. Why should the CEO make good decisions if they can just work for a year or two and then golden-parachute their ways to a few million? Why should your DVD player last for more than a year? The point is, they already have your money. Be it your money in the hands of a manufacturer of a cheap knockoff that lasted two weeks before dying, or be it the money of a company in the hands of some greedy asshole who doesn't give a damn about anything except for his own paycheck.

      --
      Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    23. Re:What would Stallman say? by sjames · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's conceptually easy. Doing it repeatedly and fast enough to not have the line pile up behind you is not easy. Licking a stamp is extremely easy. Try licking a few thousand an hour and you'll see what I mean.

    24. Re:What would Stallman say? by RockDoctor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Depends on the sense of "easy" you mean. From what I understand, the work involved in factory jobs is insanely easy,

      Sounds to me like you've never worked in a factory.

      Ever tried scraping Guinea-pig shit off cages for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, in stinking "high" summer? Even after 6 weeks, Monday morning normally involves struggling to keep your breakfast down. (OK, in a hospital, not a factory.)

      Ever tried spending all day climbing around inside 10m tall machines, trying to get to obscurely-placed grease points to pump them, or getting to a lube-oil tank to install the drain hose, then fill up with flushing oil, then drain again, then fill with the next year's worth of lube oil. See those 40 mixing vats - go inspect the oil level in every gear box, and top up as necessary ; here's your 25l top-up tank, carry it to the top of each separate tank. This afternoon, you can do the vats in the next building, but they need a different type of oil.

      Ever tried dashing up to the top of a 250ft tower, in a Force 9 and rising gale, because NOW is the only opportunity that you're going to have this month to clean the various sensors up there, and it needs to be done this week.

      Been there, done that, got the tee-shirt and the industrially-damaged hearing and dermatitis. And believe me,working 20-hour days (bed-to-bed, including 1 hour/day for food, shit and coffee breaks) in the geology lab is a lot preferable to working on the shop floor.

      I would really, strongly, advise you to spend one or more of your summers working at the bottom of the industrial pile. NOTHING but NOTHING will improve your motivation to get a better job more than some experience of what for most people is "real life". Love of money and such like trivia are nothing compared to the motivation of avoiding hard work.

      Hey, I can even SlashDot while supervising a gas system calibration and doing a system backup!

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    25. Re:What would Stallman say? by mentaldrano · · Score: 2, Informative

      The ONE TIME there is actually a period at the end of the URL, I get screwed. Here is the correct link: Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co.

  32. Apple Retail Stores... by taperkat · · Score: 2, Informative
    are one of the weirdest places I have ever worked.

    Notice, this is past tense.

    I was a part time employee, working 35-40 hours a week. I was doing their inhouse training - all of it, getting within the top 50 company wide - outselling everyone in my store, getting commendations from Corporate because my customers kept contacting them saying how good of a job I did, all of this that sounds like a good retail "slave" would do. I was not late (when some people had over 50-75 late arrivals in 6 months, and were not fired), I did my job, and I did it very well. And yes, I still have documentation from the customers I did work with.

    But I was told I was, basically, not kissing enough ass - ie: I didn't feel special to work for Apple, nor did I think I was - I was not able to get full time. They would encourage a process where you are *supposed* to be able to give and receive feedback openly and honestly, and it ended up this wasn't the case. Basically, if you dared to tell a manager or one of their worker flunkies anything but sunshine, rainbows, and clowns, you were on a blacklist.

    They didn't want to give benefits, but they still wanted me to work full time.. needless to say, I left the company within a month after this. At the time, I had worked full time hours for approximately 3 months. The other 6 months I was not making enough money to pay rent, much less anything else. The stress from working at an Apple Retail Store was not worth the "cool shirts" and the "cool people".

    There are a lot more extenuating circumstances to this, but I'm still considering talking to Corporate, and by Corporate, I mean at the top, so I'll leave it at the beginning. (Mismanagement, Harassment, from the top down, and coverups from Corporate from that matter too, including the fact I basically got railroaded and told my problems didn't matter, when I was going through the handbook and pointing out violations.)

    Did they give great discounts? I'm sure. But for working there 9 months, all I still own made by Apple is an iPod. Because they sure as hell didn't pay enough to pay bills, much less buy their products.

    I think there could be something more to this story if you look past what he called it, and actually looked at the business practices and violations that are maintained and held - and defended - by Corporate.

    --
    "But I can't get an ocean that's deep enough for my day..." ~The Frames, "Fitzcarraldo"
  33. Re:Err,actually... Europe is horridly uncompetitiv by Nursie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Umm, no, we are about as productive, as the US suffers from "presenteeism", where people show up and don't do anything.

    There's only so many useful hours of work you can get out of someone in a week. The law of diminishing returns applies here.

  34. Bloody Commies by JohnnyGTO · · Score: 2, Funny

    They should pay for the rights to work at that great institution. What next 401k's and holidays off?

    --
    Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
  35. Re:import limits? by mitgib · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Didn't they do this as the result of import limits?

    That could very well be true also. I live a county or two over from the BMW plant here in South Carolina, a plant that is being doubled in size curently, and also doubling it's workforce. BMW was quoted in the paper saying it was cheaper for them to make the cars here and ship them to Germany and the rest of the EU mostly due to the weak dollar. I'm sure there are a million other reasons, but that was their statement.

    --
    Being a spelling & grammar Nazi is a sign you do not poses the intelligence to contribute to the conversation
  36. It's the law by jhfry · · Score: 4, Informative

    Read the laws reguarding overtime. According the the Fair Labor Standards Act, an employee must be classified as exempt by meeting certain legal requirements, or they must be paid 1.5x their hourly wage. The law specifically states that no contract or agreement between employee and employer can override the law.

    Read all about it, you very well might be a victim too!
    http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/flsa/

    --
    Sometimes the best solution is to stop wasting time looking for an easy solution.
  37. Re:cry me a river... by faedle · · Score: 2, Informative

    Computer programmers, systems administrators, computer analysts, and engineers are on the "exempt" list.

    As a rule, the IT profession gets screwed by the "exempt" status. We're "professionals", yet we don't have the same level of autonomy as most of the "professional" classes (lawyers, doctors, etc).

    Working an occasional 60-hour week when things are rough / deadlines are slipping is expected in this business. Working 60 to 80-hour weeks all the time is not only abusive, it's counterproductive. There's only so much brainpower one can engage: and I'd bet that the vast majority of that 60-hour week is unproductive time anyway.

  38. Re:"entitled" by faedle · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I come from a farming family, and the "working sun-up to after sundown" bit is pure BS.

    For about six weeks, yes, my aunt and uncle work from 5 am to around 6 pm: about four weeks in the beginning of the season and about two around harvest time. The remainder of the year they probably work an average 8 hour day just like everybody else. In winter, there's a couple of weeks that they aren't doing anything and often take a vacation.

    There's nothing wrong with the American work ethic. It's boneheads like you that live to work, not work to live, that need to figure it out. Most Europeans don't work nearly as many hours as the average American in the same job.. and who's currency is getting trashed right now?

  39. iScrip by YetAnotherProgrammer · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just give the worker iTunes credits. Then that could lead to an iUnion and an iStrike. It would be just like my grandfather's time in the coal mines.

    --
    Sic Semper MicroSoft
  40. Because slavery is a worse problem... by pagewalker · · Score: 3, Informative

    No one's saying denying workers their rights under CA law is a good thing. But slavery is also a huge problem, and a much worse one on an individual level than not getting one's work break.

    It would be like someone living in a normal apartment in Boston that had a problem with the hot water heater every four hours complaining that they were being forced to live in an outhouse. Or a tar pit. Only like there really were millions who had to live in outhouses and tar pits. The claim takes the focus away from the hot water heater.

    And there really are millions of slaves.

    --
    Thousands are enslaved every day. A River of In
  41. Re: unions by purpleraison · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Auto unions also tend to produce employees who are complacent at best. They know they are protected by the union and do crappy work as a whole.

    Toyota is smart, because keeping unions out also increases their ability to ensure quality exists.

    Compare GM cars with Toyota, and the results should be obvious.

    --
    I am open source, and Linux baby!
  42. Re: unions by mdozturk · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I worked as a contractor at Chrysler and maintained their driving simulator. There was a union guy in the lab that was responsible for moving stuff around (I'd get fired if I moved a PC, I had to ask him to do it). Since we weren't moving stuff around much, he spent most of the day sleeping. Every once and a while the mock-up shop needed him to build a 1-1 scale car out of wood. It would take him a few days to build an exact replica of a new vehicle. The work he did (does?) was amazing.

    Long story short: people with great potential and skills are sitting around doing nothing.

  43. Re:Geeks get overtime pay? by morari · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why would anyone work over without compensation? No one goes to their daily job because they like to, or because they want to help out the company. Thinking that you're doing so and will see some magical return in good grace is ridiculous. No manager or CEO would ever go out of their way to help you, so you shouldn't go out of your way to help them.

    --
    "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
  44. Getting hung up on terminology. by BigGar' · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A lot of people are getting hung up on the use of the word slavery in this context. Now, I agree that what were seeing here isn't remotely close to slavery, indentured servitude, etc.

    But use of on "over the top" word doesn't change the possibility that Apple's employment practices may be violation of State or Federal law. A lot of employers over use the salaried position category to avoid paying overtime. Most employee's do not understand their rights enough to know the difference to they put up with it assuming that is just part of the job, when, in fact, they are being abused.

    --


    Shop smart, Shop S-Mart.
  45. I used to work for a company like this... by BigBadBus · · Score: 2, Interesting
  46. Don't forget the worst part of this remake... by MsGeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Keanu as Klaatu. Don't forget that part of the story. Keanu Reeves adds suck to just about anything he touches. His manager/agent recently got the rights to do a live-action version of Cowboy Bebop, so now it's almost a certainty that will be FUBAR as well. Keanu will either be Spike or Vicious. Guaranteed suckfest.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
    1. Re:Don't forget the worst part of this remake... by hairyfeet · · Score: 2, Informative

      Don't forget the "whoa" count. I swear if Keanu didn't say "whoa" at LEAST 2 dozen times a movie,the world would probably stop spinning on its axis. I bet this movie is going to suck hard enough to power T. Boone's windmills for a decade. But as always this is my 02c,YMMV.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  47. Re:STFU or go back to open source you whiners !! by Hal_Porter · · Score: 5, Funny

    Mac fans show their people skills again.

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  48. Re: unions by zolaar · · Score: 2, Funny

    Long story short: people with great potential and skills are sitting around doing nothing.

    On Slashdot, this goes without saying...

    --
    One man's constant is another man's variable.
  49. Modern Day Slaves? by doomicon · · Score: 3, Funny

    I wholeheartedly agree that Apple is required to follow state work laws, and should be punished if they are not doing so.

    HOWEVER.. some IT Dork that probably makes 85k+ a year calling himself a "Modern Day Slave", because he doesn't get overtime? I'm sure there a some illegals working in textile plants that would disagree.

    --

    Awesome!
  50. 6-figure slaves by OrangeTide · · Score: 2, Funny

    Please, you have to be joking. Most of these people are getting paid handsomely. A slave is someone who doesn't get paid and has no choice. In California you can legally quit your job any time you want. Once you are making the big bucks you're a professional, and as far as I know you don't require additional compensation such as overtime.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  51. McJobs aren't for kids alone. by Valdrax · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Are you kidding? Why do you want to mess with min. wage fast food jobs? I mean...these are NOT meant to be living wages. They are they are there for high school and college kids to earn extra money while in school.
    [...]
    Hmm..I don't eat fast food very often [...]

    It shows. I mean, when's the last time you saw a fast food restaurant that was mostly staffed by teenagers & college students? For me, it was the 90's, and it was a Chick-Fil-A that made a point of hiring kids from the local foster homes they sponsor.

    The vast majority of fast food workers I see are low-income wage slaves who do not (and will not) have a college education, just trying to get by. This is true even if you cut out the kitchen staff (which stopped being kids and started being immigrant labor as far back as when *I* was a kid). I'd say that I only see someone in that high school to college age group maybe 1 in 5 times I eat at a fast food restaurant, and I almost never see two people in that age group.

    I have mixed feelings about unionizing fast food, but stop believing the fantasy that kids are the only people working McJobs. It's just not true anymore in the places where I've lived.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  52. No, but... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... we CAN say "precedent".

    Not quite the same thing. :o)

  53. What are the pay ranges? by tyrione · · Score: 2, Funny

    I worked at NeXT and Apple. I'd love to see what their pay ranges are for if they are above $25/hr they can f**k right off as anyone getting that kind of wage field support calls is money ahead.

    Hell, when I started as an QA engineer for NeXT it was $19.50/hr for a 6 week trial run. It was later regular-full-time salaried employee but the wage sure as hell didn't jump up like you'd expect--I just had a starting point to expand into engineering.

    Later on when the merger happened most reviews and salaries were frozen until solvency was returned. I worked 60 hours a week and that actually wasn't a problem for me as the work was enjoyable. The problem occurred when I got sick of my reviews being delayed so I left.

    I'll say this, the jobs since then have been far less enjoyable, mindnumbingly boring and even the pay increases weren't much so in hindsight it was a stupid move.

    As a multiple degree engineer [mechanical and computer science] I sure as hell am not going to feel pity for call center support personnel whining if that hourly rate is above $25/hr.

    My team of 5 supported hundreds of Enterprise NeXT customers daily and we had tens of thousands of logs to maintain, edit, open, cross-reference, include changes and close, while walking joe blow developer through a redeployment, Netinfo redesign of master/slave relationships, to EOF database models, to checking over Openstep code, system installs of 4 architectures, et.al BEFORE we escalated it to Engineering proper [AppKit, FoundationKit, WOF, etc]

    I have a suggestion: find a competitive environment that is comparable to Apple Call Centers and leave if you think it's better, or improve your technology skills and network at Apple's main campus to see if there are job openings you'd be a fit. Opportunity exists if you can see beyond the Call Center job.

  54. the complaint by arendt · · Score: 2, Informative
  55. I'm disappointed by tehcyder · · Score: 2, Funny
    There's not nearly enough of a flamefest going on here so far.

    Where are the vicious digs at Apple users' sexuality and lifestyles? Where are the drooling Apple fanboys defending slavery?

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  56. Re:Everyone? by jwilcox154 · · Score: 2

    Well, let's see. The so-called "death threats" against you are not death threats at all. A couple of them are asking you to commit suicide, another is even stating you will eventually self destruct. A "death threat" is where someone threatens to kill someone else. None of the comments had such wording or even remotely resembling the wording.

    Also, those you call Microsoft or "M$" lovers and haters of free software are nothing of the sort. It is possible to like both closed source and open source software. Just because someone doesn't use M$, Micro$haft, or Windoze doesn't mean they hate open source or Linux. One example you gave was Keith Russell. If he hated open-source software and loved Microsoft as you claim, then he wouldn't be making statements like "This is one of the things that will allow Linux, and FOSS in general, to win in the long term. The multitude of voices and opinions tend to be self-correcting, with benelovent dictators like Linus Torvalds keeping the focus on building up their own products, not tearing down the opposition."1 or "I don't think Microsoft cares that Blu-Ray is Sony's standard, just that it's not Microsoft's standard."

    There is no Microsoft conspiracy against you. The reason you have been modded down is because you use "M$" and "Windoze" Microsoft and Windows, which is just as childish as using "Linsux" and "Open Sores" when describing "GNU/Linux" and "Open Source" There are many people on Slashdot who speak against Microsoft and still get modded up. If it were a conspiracy then anyone speaking against Microsoft would be modded down on the spot.

    As for Apple, if this is true then a lawsuit is the least of their worries. Apple should worry more about their customers leaving them. Microsoft does at least treats their employees well, homosexuals included.3456 Apple should be treating their employees with more respect.

    Sources :
    1 - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=197140&cid=16158708
    2 - http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=497526&cid=22846284
    3 - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3128913
    4 - http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/346431_antiochmsft08.html
    5 - http://www.vault.com/survey/employee/Microsoft-Corporation-EMPLOYEER-3726.html
    6 - http://www.brianblog.com/archives/2005_05.html