Slashdot Mirror


Teamsters Seek To Unionize More Tech Shuttle Bus Drivers In Silicon Valley

An anonymous reader writes with news about the effort to unionize shuttle drivers in Silicon Valley. "Shuttle bus drivers for five prominent tech companies will decide whether to unionize on Friday in a vote that has the potential to dramatically expand organized labor's territory in Silicon Valley and embolden others in the tech industry's burgeoning class of service workers to demand better working conditions. Drivers who ferry Yahoo, Apple, Genentech, eBay and Zynga workers -- all employed by contractor Compass Transportation -- will decide whether to join the Teamsters union in an election overseen by the National Labor Relations Board. Union leaders say they want to bring the drivers into the fold so they can negotiate better pay and benefits -- as well as relief from a split shift that has the drivers working morning and evening shifts with no pay in between. A contract the Teamsters struck over the weekend for Facebook's shuttle bus drivers, who work for Loop Transportation, offers a glimpse of what may be possible: paid sick and vacation time, full health care coverage and wages of up to $27.50 an hour."

29 of 301 comments (clear)

  1. That is okay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Before too long we won't need the bus drivers. Automated cars will smash the unions

    1. Re:That is okay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      1) Unions are collective bargaining. Collective bargaining forms the basis for an intelligent, social civilisastion. Some unions are good for workers, campaigning for an end to the dire conditions found themselves enduring through early C20, and others are corrupt and useless (in Western Europe I have rarely found a harmful union, but the US is so hardline capitalist that even some of its unions end up top-heavy), but saying "smash the unions!" is like shouting "GMO is evil!" - it's a nonsense blanket statement by an anti-science ideologue;

      2) Soon sufficient automation will make you unemployed. Be careful what you wish for, because it's only hubris that's keeping you confident. Unless you're a multimillionaire you're not secure, and a sufficiently small handful of multimillionaires in an automated utopia will soon find nobody is interested in protecting their wealth.

    2. Re:That is okay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "smash the unions!" is like shouting "GMO is evil!"

      Right now, at this time, people and small business (and thus the economy) are losing a lot of money because unions are closing down the docks in major ports. Why? Because they want their uneducated box-pushers who are already earning 147k a year, to make even more. Did you read that? People who did not invest in any degree, dropped out of high school and got a job at the docks earning 147k a year, and are now demanding more. Demanding more by crippling the rest of the economy. Are you kidding me?

      TFA even says:

      "Now is the opportunity for shuttle bus drivers, for food service workers, for janitors, for security officers to re-ask the question: Should I be equally as valued as the high tech workers in the high tech industry?" said David Huerta, president of United Service Workers West.

      Really? I mean, really? Are you seriously expecting an employee without a high school diploma doing the most simple job in the world to earn the same income as someone with a Master's degree or PHD? Really? That's just plain nonsense. Remember that all they do is drive a vehicle from A to B. Something that all of us do on a very regular basis.

      Let's for a moment look at a Bay Area without bus drivers. There would be a bit more cars on the road so it would take me an hour to get to work instead of 40 minutes. And perhaps I'd work from home a bit more.

      Now let's see what would happen to Apple, Google or Facebook if there would be no software engineers. Oh wait, I forgot. There would be no Apple, Google, or Facebook.

      Is it really that weird that tech companies pay their high value tech employees more than the average bus driver?

      The one thing that I agree with, and I agree with that very strongly, is that everyone who has a full time job should be able to earn a living wage and get healthcare benefits. Every single bus driver, every single janitor, every single security guard should be able to put a roof over their head, buy some nice toys for their kids and go to Disneyland once in a while. So in that sense, I do agree with the outcome of the process, and even think that the $27,50 is a bit low. $35 would be better and fair, considering the housing market in the Bay area.

      But they should also realize that if they had done better in school (no, that English major does not count), they could have had a tech job as well. It takes 16+ years of education to get a Master's degree. It takes less than 16 months to get a commercial driver's license. That fact is embedded in tech workers wages.

    3. Re:That is okay by dywolf · · Score: 3, Insightful

      the simple fact of the matter is that EVERYONE is underpaid.
      that doesn't mean you should begrudge the dockworker a decent living simply because "they're uneducated box pushers".

      rather, the key to boosting everyones' pay to where it should be is to start raising wages.
      the economy can handle it easily.

      The simple fact of the matter is that is wages had kept pace with productivity the current median wage would be ~140k/yr, and not the current anemic ~50k/yr.

      All the extra revenue from that increased productivity has been going to the executives, the CEOs, the 0.1%, since the mid 70s. Ever since they first started weakening the unions, spreading the myth of "trickle down economics", and generally f---ing over the middle class who built this country and its economy. God forbid the people who actually generate that revenue, who actually caused the growth in the economy, share in the fruits of their labor.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    4. Re:That is okay by NotDrWho · · Score: 4, Funny

      Automated cars will smash the unions

      Well, until all the unemployed workers smash the automated cars.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    5. Re:That is okay by Wycliffe · · Score: 4, Informative

      People said two decades ago that we would all have 30 hour work weeks from home in paperless offices thanks to technology. See how that turned out.

      Unfortunately, the main reason this hasn't happened is because it's easier, more efficient, and cheaper* to train one person and have
      them work 60 hours a week than it is to train 2 people and have them each work 30 hours a week.

      *It's cheaper even IF companies were required to pay overtime (which many don't). Time and a half is cheaper than the added
      expense of medical, additional training, and Brooks's law.

    6. Re:That is okay by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Funny

      Before too long we won't need the bus drivers. Automated cars will smash the unions

      I hope their steering is better than that

    7. Re:That is okay by Serzen · · Score: 3, Interesting
      37.5 hours here, full-time, full benefits (medical, dental, life, vision, hearing, retirement match of 9%), extraordinary paid time away (medical, personal, vacation). I have the option to flex my hours to meet my own schedule instead of work's. But I work in higher education, so I know it's not the norm.

      I know, 37.5 might as well be 40, but a lot of places in the area consider 37.5 to be full-time. Just pointing out that the 40-hour week is starting to be scaled back.

    8. Re:That is okay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Obamacare got many people the 29.95 hour work week.

  2. Slashdot by ledow · · Score: 5, Informative

    Anybody else's Slashdot break today?

    I've gone to this top-menu-bar thing, with no left gap at all, with no comment button at all (only Reply To This, sorry!) without warning.

    Also, the content is trapped in the left-hand half of the page and won't stretch across.

    Not only that, by on the same screen where I have "Ads Disabled" checked, I see an ad.

    Slashdot, seriously, without a comment button, I'm gone for good this time.

    1. Re:Slashdot by Cenan · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, intern #22451 pushed his amateur-hour changes and went home for the day. Testing is for pussies.

      --
      ... whatever ...
    2. Re:Slashdot by ledow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, I have Javascript enabled, have latest Chrome. It's just borked, and it only happened today (no updates to software between yesterday and today - same browser session still running in fact!) but the site now doesn't render at all nicely and it LOOKS deliberate, but I'm missing any kind of Post button at all.

  3. Sick by symes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I do not like unpaid sick leave in some industries - particularly nurses, healthcare workers and the like. It means people are more likely to work when they are ill, forced to by financial concerns. Not good when they are dealing with people who are vulnerable. Same is true, to some extent, for bus drivers. Driving a bunch of people around while suffering from fever, etc., is going to effect their ability to drive. There's probably a compromise, such that drivers get 50% pay when ill. But would still prefer to see someone not drive me around while suffering from poor health. So what is good for workers and unions can also be good for customers as well.

    1. Re:Sick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It boggles my mind that in the richest country in the world, there is even debate over this. The rest of the world has already realized that of course someone shouldn't lose their house or their job because they got the flu.

    2. Re:Sick by Virtucon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Richest by getting rid of basic things like paid sick leave and turning workers into temps or "contract workers." In this instance I wish the teamsters luck because having drivers sit all day as "down time" when then can't really do anything else except hang around the bus and not get paid is also pretty fucked up.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    3. Re:Sick by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, this "richest country in the world" business is somewhat misleading. It means the country with the greatest aggregate economic power, not the country where people tend to be the best off. You need to look at several measures before you can begin to understand the thing that's mystifying you.

      By total GDP the US is by far the wealthiest nation in the world. It has almost twice the total GDP of the second country on the list, China. By *per capita* GDP, the US is about 10th on the list, just below Switzerland; so by global standards the typical American is wealthy, but not the wealthiest. On the other hand the US ranks about 20th in cost of living, so the typical American has it pretty good.

      Where things get interesting is if you look at GINI -- a measure of economic disparity. The most equal countries are of course the Scandinavians, with Denmark, Sweden and Norway topping the list. The US is far from the *least* equal (Seychelles, South Africa, and Comoros), but it is kind of surprising when you look at countries near the US on the list. Normally in most economic measures you see the US ranked near advanced industrialized countries in Europe, but it's neighbors on the GINI list are places like Turkmenistan, Qatar, and El Salvador.

      What this means is that we have significant classes on either end of the scale: the *very* wealthy and an economic underclass. Now because of the total wealth sloshing around in the US, the US underclass has it pretty well compared to the underclass in, say, India. But what this doesn't buy is clout or respect. "Poor" households in the US usually have TVs and refrigerators -- a fact that seems to anger some people, who see the poor in the US as ungrateful people who are too lazy to improve themselves. But a study by the OECD suggests that they don't have the *time* to improve themselves. In a ranking of countries by time spend on leisure and self-care the US ranks 33rd, at 14.3 hours lagging almost two hours per day behind world leader Denmark (big surprise). But remember this is an average; it doesn't represent the time available for the poor.

      Most Americans seem to think that poor people spend all their time sitting around waiting for handouts. This willfully ignores the phenomenon of the working poor. After selling my company, I volunteered on a lark at a charity which refurbishes old furniture and household stuff and furnishes the homes of poor people, and I found poor people to be neither lazy nor ungrateful. Let me tell you I have never met so many people who work two or sometimes more jobs. Particularly shocking were the number of women who took their children out of abusive relationships, and then have to work a full time job, raise three or four kids, without a car and in a neighborhood that doesn't have a grocery store. You don't know what gratitude is until you've given a poor, overtaxed mother beds when her children have been sleeping on the floor for months.

      When some smug, ignorant and conspicuously well-fed media head starts whining about the poor having refrigerators, it makes me want to punch them in the mouth.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    4. Re:Sick by geoskd · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If I had mod points, I'd have modded you up.

      I grew up as the only conservative in a family of upper middle class liberals. It always infuriated me that poor people were constantly getting free stuff, and I bought in to the whole poor people are lazy mentality. Once I graduated, I found myself working in a company that employs a great deal of the bottom of society. (I started there myself thanks to the collapse in '01). I was lucky enough to have a good family watching out for me, and I didn't stay on the bottom long, but I've been there. As a result of my experiences, I have moved much farther left on the spectrum, but I will note a few things here that need to be said.

      First, I find far more lazy people in the middle classes than on the bottom or the top. Those on the top work hard because they are driven (this is what gets them to the top). Those on the bottom work hard because they have to in order to survive. They often have no hope, and no future because we have built the system in this country to virtually guarantee their continued failure. Those in the middle have the breathing room to be lazy, and some of them are. Unions historically protect all of their employees equally, which is mostly taken advantage of by the lazy members (definitely not the majority of union members, but a noticeable minority). It is this enabling power of unions that pisses people off about them. Unions need to stop protecting lazy workers. This is critical to their continued support from the rest of society. Unions have to take steps to ensure that their lazy members are compensated equitably to the effort they put in. A stupid lazy union member should not get paid the same as a motivated intelligent union member when all other factors are equal. That trait of unions is pretty much the only real reason anyone is opposed to unions in the first place. All other reasons are essentially window dressing around the real issue.

      We need to stop giving money to the poor. They don't need money. What they need is a systematic, comprehensive, plan for how to get them off the bottom. The single biggest factor keeping poor people poor, is the responsibility for children. As noted, often times, a parent finds themselves as the sole caregiver for children, and they are consequently trapped, as the responsibilities of childrearing often conflict with the responsibilities that employers would place upon employees (such as reliable attendance, and schedule flexibility). The simplest solution to the problem would be to do away with welfare and unemployment benefits entirely and replace them with guaranteed services for their dependents such as 50 hours of weekly daycare, Free medical services for dependents, Three daily meals for dependents. All of those services combined would be cheaper than welfare and would provide far more benefit to society. Individuals, when freed from many of the responsibilities of dependent care, would be far more able to work the kinds of schedules that employers want/need. Being only financially responsible for themselves would allow them to choose better paths for their own career advancement (including continuing education), that would otherwise be impossible to manage while being primary caregiver.

      Mind you I am not proposing making these options available only to the poor, I am proposing that society provide that level of service for all its citizens as a way to level the playing field for all parties. In the end, it will only help the next generation, when they don't have to grow up seeing their parent(s) trapped in poverty with no hope of escape, and no obvious way that the children can avoid the same fate.

      --
      I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
    5. Re:Sick by ISayWeOnlyToBePolite · · Score: 3, Informative

      Look at Sweden for example. What you're stating simply isn't true. In 2013, 15.9% of the population was born outside of Sweden.
      Anyone in the EU is free to settle in any other EU contry (Sweden is a EU country, just as Romania).
      Anyone from outside the EU is free to work in Sweden provided that they can show an offer of employment with a monthly salary of at least 13000 sek
      (about 1560 usd), and after four years they can apply for permanent residency.

      The diffrence is a welfare state and unions.

  4. In related news... by tlambert · · Score: 4, Funny

    In related news... Yahoo, Apple, Genentech, eBay and Zynga will decide whether or not they will contract their transportation services from someone other than Compass Transportation Monday.

    Welcome to an "at will" state, Teamsters!

    1. Re:In related news... by Virtucon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well if I worked for any of those companies and utilized these buses, I'd want to make sure that the guys at the wheel were at least satisfied with what they were doing and not ill nor overworked; especially if I had to put my life in their hands.

      --
      Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  5. Re:... Driverless cars? by Phillip2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As the article points out, this is not a big cost for the companies involved. Unionisation of the buses is not going to make the slightest bit of difference whatsoever to Google's desire to generate a self-driving vehicle. The market is enormous, so they have all the incentive in the world.

    What is going to make a difference to these companies is some degree of collective action. We know that many SV companies have been involved in collection action in the past, with non-compete agreements to keep wages of high-skilled workers low. It is a good thing if the shoe is on the other foot for a while. The only real sad thing is that this is unlikely to spread to where it is really needed -- in the third world sweat shop supply chains.

  6. Re:... Driverless cars? by Krishnoid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They're the sort of union that if they don't get what they want they sometimes break equipment, throw bricks through windows with murder threats on them, and other fucking insane bullshit.

    Were this a union group without that reputation then I'd give them the benefit of the doubt. But this is the teamsters. They've a reputation of being rough with people that don't give them what they want. And the reality is that no one has patience for that shit anymore.

    Or the anonymity, for that matter -- approaching a Google Street View car from any direction, probably results in enough images being captured of you from enough angles to turn your vandalism attempt into a scene from the Matrix. If they haven't matured out of that old-school kind of approach even today, a little technology may not be sufficient to get them to change their ways fast enough.

  7. Re:... Driverless cars? by Karmashock · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They used to save lives. Like a lot of things that had a point once... their time has past.

    I mentioned several times that unions have done some really good things in the past. And really, I have no problem with unions in principle. However, there are bad unions that need to just die. And the teamsters are on that list.

    The teamsters, the dock workers, the auto workers union, and a couple others are not helping anyone besides the union leadership. Pissing off the companies or making it unprofitable to operate in various areas doesn't help the workers. It costs jobs and closes factories and encourages outsourcing.

    If the unions stuck to making sure work environments were safe they wouldn't have the reputation they've earned.

    You're going to have to deal with that reputation. Is google full of angels? Nope... but they're not full of retarded assholes either. And the teamsters is that.

    Again... they have a rep. And my father personally dealt with them and confirms it.

    My father just so you understand probably one of the most peaceful kind quiet men you'll ever meet in your life. As I said above, the company he was working for sent him to get the teamster's terms from their negotiator and the guy basically suggested he was going to beat my father up... In the conference room.

    They're fucking baboons. You want to tell me about the good things unions do? I'm not talking about all unions. I'm talking about THAT union and any union like them. There are a bunch of unions that have a bad reputation of intimidation, vandalism, extortion, and general thuggery. Not all unions have that reputation. There are lots of unions that are on great terms with their industry partners and always have been. These are the unions that understand that the only way they get paid is if the company makes money and if business happens. They go to negotiating tables and understand they're not going to get everything they want.

    Look at the shit the dock workers union is pulling RIGHT NOW. Its going to cost the US economy around 30 or so billion dollars and that was as of the last time I checked. And why? Because the wages they're getting paid that lots of people would fucking kill for aren't enough.

    And here is my big problem with unions like that... often there is no alternative. It is a monopoly on labor.

    If at the very least a given company could bargain between a few competing unions then at least they might be able to have a REAL negotiation. But when only ONE organization controls ALL the labor... you're fucked. The union knows you're fucked. And so the stupid ones fuck you. And companies don't like to get fucked. You fuck them enough and they start to think of ANY way what so ever out of that situation.

    And while it might take some time... they tend to find a way out. The Unions that have been losing membership for generations are largely doing so because they over played their hands. There are several unions that haven't lost that much membership. Oh yes. Unions that are roughly as strong as they ever were... and they tend to have much better relationships with everyone because they don't play power games. Most of these unions represent skilled labor and the unions tend to restrict themselves to setting safety policy or working conditions. They actually tend to avoid involving themselves in wage negotiations leaving that up their members to work out individually. I know, that seems odd. But such unions exist.

    And they do what you said... they save lives. That is where they start and that is where they stop. If the teamsters did that, they'd have a much different reputation. But they don't... and they have the rep they have.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  8. Samzenpus reminding you to hate the unions! by damn_registrars · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because it would, of course, be a terrible thing if drivers were well qualified, reasonably paid, and respected by their employers. Really, who doesn't wish they could work 70+ hours a week for 35 hours of pay? And job stability is so 1950s...

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  9. Re:That is okay, the end is nigh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > It takes 16+ years of education to get a Master's degree. It takes less than 16 months to get a commercial driver's license. That fact is embedded in tech workers wages.

    Someone with education of a Master's degree messes up work: sorry for the bug, we'll release a hotfix patch or a service pack soon, we thank you for your patience in the while!

    Someone with commercial driver's license messes up work: CNN breaking news, schoolbus careens into river, two dozen kids missing. In other news, 18-wheeler carrying barrels of concentrated fluoric acid explodes upon collision with town hall, 20 dead, 750 citizens evacuated, national guard mobilized, FEMA sets up local command centre.

    It is also not OK that LGBT hairdressers earn seven figures a year, while garbage collectors earn 15 USD / hour. No garbage collection => megacity soon depopulated by diseases. No LBGT hairdresser => put a pot over your head and cut off what sticks out! The free world / western / americanized capitalist society is totally fsck'ed up when it comes to moral values and labour relations. The managers become little divine kings in their palaces and luxury sedans and flying chariot, while many common people become more and more like peasants or even serfs. The decadent and hedonistic first world is heading to a crash soon, one which will eclipse that of ancient Roman Empire.

    After that comes a new Dark Age, where the equally insane asian-despotic, planned economy regime principle will be the celebrated leitmotif and China or Putinistan will act as role models for most of the world. Is there a need for history to repeat itself over and over again, as if mandated by a natural law? Isn't it possible create stable and just societies everywhere, like Scandinavia, where respect for the common good makes everybody's life for the better?

  10. Re:... Driverless cars? by PPalmgren · · Score: 3, Informative

    Mod parent up. On the discussion of safety regarding dock workers, you are correct in that they have actually gone so far that they make it less safe. The unions are so terrified of any kind of automation removing jobs that they refuse tech advancements that take the workers off the dock and put them in offices operating remotely, which takes them out of harm's way. It is very common in Europe but doesn't happen in the US.

  11. Sure, Blame The Unions by Greyfox · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Short sighted leadership making cars no one wanted had nothing to do with it.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  12. Re:... Driverless cars? by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have a good friend whom I've known for years who is a Teamster. To be honest, I feel your ridiculous and long winded account of Teamsters is quite off the mark.
    Perhaps if you saw and heard things from the other side you might change your opinion. But I doubt it. It appears you already know everything their is to know about what it's like to be a Teamster, and what they put up with. Thanks for that shower of wisdom.

    Again, my knowledge about their job isn't first person, just coming from what my very good friend has told me for the last twenty years or so. I can tell you this though, your 1970's era opinions of unions being all powerful are about as anachronistic as holding up your lighter during Freebird at a Lynyrd Skynyrd concert.

    My friend has described in detail how they continue to "get fucked" everytime their new contracts come up. And yes, he tells me the details of thier contracts, what has changed, how it used to be, etc; He actually doesn't like telling me most of it, but I'm quite interested in how that process works, how they negotiate, etc;

    The Teamsters don't get their cake and eat it to, as those with a Mussoliniesque political bent would have everyone believe.
    Unioins, and especially the Teamsters are a pale shadow of their former selves.

    Now to the real point.
    Yes, we will have driverless vehicles in the not too distant future.
    Yes, most if not all of the driving professions will disappear quite rapidly after that happens.
    Yes, that will put even more people out of work, with no or little hope of a future profession now that their livelihood has disappeared.

    --
    We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
  13. Re:That is okay, the end is nigh! by Rich0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A better example of a coding error might be this one.