Slashdot Mirror
Tesla Faces Labor Board Complaint Alleging Interference With Unionization (arstechnica.com)
According to Ars Technica, a federal labor board on Thursday "filed a complaint against Tesla, alleging that the electric vehicle company had discouraged workers from distributing pro-union information, stopped them from talking about employee safety to the United Auto Workers (UAW) union, and in one case, prevented an employee from taking a picture of the Confidentiality Agreement they had to sign." From the report: The Oakland, California-based regional office of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) consolidated the complaints of three former Tesla employees, Michael Sanchez, Jonathan Galescu, and Richard Ortiz, as well as complaints made by UAW. The complaint alleges that on numerous occasions between February 2017 and May 2017, security guards and human resources agents working on behalf of Tesla told employees that they had to leave the Fremont, California, factory premises because they were distributing pro-union leaflets. In addition, one employee says that over the course of two meetings, a Human Resources Business Partner and an Environmental Health Safety and Sustainability Specialist "interrogated the employee about the employee's Union and/or protected, concerted activities," as well as the pro-union activities of other employees. In March, the complaint claims, a supervisor told his employees during a pre-shift meeting that they could not distribute any stickers or pamphlets that hadn't been approved by Tesla first, or they would be fired. In another incident, a Human Resources Business Partner allegedly "attempted to prohibit an employee from discussing safety concerns with other employees and/or with the Union."
No, that is just you having no professional pride.
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
All Tesla has to do is demonstrate to their workers that they already are getting working conditions that meet or exceed that of other unionized shops. Once they do so in an honest and forthright fashion, the union problem goes away because why would anyone want it?
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Anecdotes and confirmation bias in an anti-union post, how original. But you don't see people questioning the very concept of banking because of Well's Fargo fraudulently signing people up for accounts they didn't ask for.
Kind of like how we could just do away with the FDA, because drug fiascos like Vioxx are a thing of the past. We can all trust our corporate overlords not to put their own greed above the interests of their own workers and customers...
Unions act as a counterbalance to corporate greed. Has corporate greed disappeared? Have companies stopped killing their workers to save a few pennies on the dollar in profits? Have they stopped demanding their workers make huge pay and benefit cuts to up quarterly dividends - even as the company is enjoying all-time high profits?
Uh huh. And how do you propose they counterbalance the (infinitely more funded) political action committees from big business? You expecting them to unilaterally disarm as the latter engages in shenanigans like getting "small government" Republicans to override city-based minimum wage increases with state laws?
This "unions only protect the lazy" bullshit is dependent on the notion that not only are you going to be happy doing your own work, but your work plus Bob's down the hall whenever he feels like slacking off. No human is built that way - unless you're in an abusive Biff Tannen/George McFly situation, in which case George is going to be doing Bill's work even at an anti-union shop. And it's not like all of you Calvinist shitweasels haven't worked with any number of slackers at union-free companies who got away with all kinds of shenanigans because they were the boss's buddy.
Dumb.
Fuck.
Er.
Eee.
If you old enough to remember the 1970's in Britain (I was at primary school) you'll remember the mess the UK was un due to Unions flexing muscle.
It was like a 3rd world country. The worst year was the infamous "winter of discontent".
I was off school either because the teachers were striking, the miners were striking (no coal, no heating, freezing school) or the school janitor was striking.
The rubbish (trash) was piling up on the streets as the refuse collectors were striking.
I would sit at home with my parents in the dark with a gas lamp because the power station had gone out on strike.
I have no love for Thatcher, her politics, policies or legacy. This union driven madness was really what brought her to power and she crushed them without mercy.
It was effectively the end of socialist Britain, the cold war had made communism a dirty world and socialism was getting a bad name thanks to the power drunk unions.
The pendulum has swung a bit too far right since then (NHS dismantlement) and, I personally, blame the unions for it.
They abused their power and we all paid for it.
Reading between the lines on this Tesla spat with unions makes me think it's a grab for power.
We're not hearing any stories of awful working conditions. Oppressed, underpaid workers or anything that would make us think 'they need help, they need a union".
I'd like to think there was protection and worker representation in place but I also don't want to see Tesla hindered in their championing of a clean automotive future due to aa union's (unnecessary) interference.
It is not surprising that in 2015 with a new production line (the Model X) that injury rates were high. However my understanding is that due to the addition of a third shift amongst other things, that the injury rate has dropped to half industry average. In all honesty, this sounds like a professional media push, even your comment. That's the problem with comment boards...no accountability. We subconsciously treat all comments as if they are expressions of honest opinion, but the reality is that many comments on hot button issues where PR companies are involved, are likely expressions of the interests of one organization or another (in this case, the UAW).
My honest opinion, as a person who believes that electrification of the transport system is the only way to begin to get a handle on reducing our dangerous carbon emissions, is that the UAW quite literally wants to bring Tesla's growth to a grinding halt. My argument for this is that they have an institutional self-interest to do so, in large part because Tesla wants to create an unprecedented fully automated manufacturing line, which will reduce membership in the union. In my experience, institutional self-interest is the best predictor of the actions of organizations.
This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when first he appears as a protector - Plato (423 to 327 BC)
If unions used to be good, they no longer are.
Why?
When their donations go to a single political party in mass and ignore what the members want, and that party votes in to make union membership mandatory, its pretty much pure corruption start to finish. Which is what we have now.
No, we don't, actually. Rather the opposite.
Getting on to government employee unions, why would they even need to exist? Except for the corruption I pointed out?
So government employees can't have their own interests which they want to see represented? Why?
If the government can't treat employees good, which the unions are there to make sure, then the entire country is pretty much screwed.
Yes, without unions, the entire country can get screwed, as can the employees. This is why they do have unions, thanks for noticing.
Its a bit of a conflict of interest for a political party to help a union that is going to donate to that party, all using tax payer money.
Nope. Once it is in the employee's hands, it is NOT tax-payer money. Sorry.
With government unions, the DNC takes the money and the tax payers get screwed.
How so? Be specific.
Oh, add in that unions are allowed to put on political ads, but the DNC thinks others shouldn't be allowed to and you have pretty much corrupted free speech with unions.
Well, this example is not true, actually.
You want people to support unions? Take the political arm out of them and you will get 90%+ of the people supporting unions. You keep it BLATENTLY corrupt, and you get the support you currently see.
Nope. What will happen if Unions can't protect their interests politically, will be that they get screwed, and 90% of the people will be impacted by it, and you'll ignore the corruption.
I understand, you being a GOP supporter, don't have a problem with corruption or abuse of power as long as it helps "your team", but the rest of us are sick of it and are doing something about it.
FTFY, HTH.
That's what all that Thatcherite apologia translates to. You were the coddled child of bourgeois shitbags who wanted that whole workers-share-in-the-benefits-of-the-economy thing to be a passing phase in the post WWII era.