this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2024
1165 points (100.0% liked)

196

16416 readers
1698 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] bleistift2@feddit.de 352 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Hey guys, listen up. The scraps Amazon is giving me are insufficient to make ends meet. UNIONS ARE THE PROBLEM!

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 149 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Jesus, when you put it like that, even if Darla isn't a robot or a paid astroturfer, she's still making the case for unions.

[–] xantoxis@lemmy.world 44 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah the argument itself is so transparently dumb that no legitimate person would hold it; and I think the dunk tweet is pointing out that in addition to having no good argument, Amazon thinks we're too stupid to notice the astroturf.

There are people who genuinely believe this, sadly. I've encountered them here where I live in South Dakota where we're propagandized against unions from a very young age. These are people who would easily fall for obvious astroturfing like Darla above. It's one reason I think basic tech and media literacy are so important.

Yeah, imagine being paid so poorly that union dues are a hardship. Maybe you could use a union there, pals.

[–] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 194 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Amazon pays me SO LITTLE I can BARELY Squeak by! And that's why UNIONS are bad!

[–] Ace0fBlades@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

I loved that even their invented stawman of a defender wasn't paid enough to support her family.

Something about the higher tax brackets turn people in soulless liches that just want to return to the nice and simple days of slavery

[–] EdibleFriend@lemmy.world 174 points 8 months ago (5 children)

Jesus fuck how can they be this pathetically transparent?

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 148 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (4 children)

Amazon probably outsourcing to a PR that specializes in union busting.

  1. But the PR firm that has little technical expertise - they just know they need bots to do some astroturfing.

  2. So the PR firm outsources to an IT consulting firm.

  3. But the IT consulting firm only bids on contracts, they don't do the actual work, so they find a subcontractor.

  4. The subcontractor may hire subcontractors. Continue this step for however many iterations the value of the contract will allow.

  5. Eventually the subcontractor hires a gig worker or an underpaid staffer to do the minimal amount of work possible.

  6. The gig worker avoids as much effort as possible, because they're paid by volume rather than time.

At this point the requirements may or may not be fulfilled, but the admins of each org are satisfied, so they move on to the next contract without verifying the work.

Edit: I wrote this facetiously, but u/SpaceNoodle found a news article suggesting at least some of these accounts are legit, as backed up by a Belling Cat investigation.

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 45 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

No, they rolled their own in-house program to get real brainwashed dolts to be "brand ambassadors."

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Not saying I don’t believe you at all, but would love to read about this if you have a source?

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 20 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

https://futurism.com/the-byte/amazon-bizarre-brand-ambassadors-real-employees

Searching for "Amazon brand ambassadors" should help you find more articles.

[–] Micromot@feddit.de 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think it's just speculations

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 16 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] Micromot@feddit.de 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Interesting, I can't verify this though

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

How do you expect to verify it? Are the quotes directly from Amazon PR in that article somehow insufficient?

[–] Micromot@feddit.de 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That's not what I 'm saying, I do believe you but it is not something I would tell someone else as a fact, knowing amazon it is very probable though

[–] SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

But ... it's a fact. It's documented. Amazon literally said they did it.

[–] Micromot@feddit.de 2 points 8 months ago

Alright, must have misread something, sorry

[–] sbv@sh.itjust.works 5 points 8 months ago

The article references a Belling Cat investigation where they find evidence suggesting it's legit: https://www.bellingcat.com/news/americas/2019/08/15/amazons-online-bezos-brigade-unleashed-on-twitter/

[–] nul@programming.dev 10 points 8 months ago

If Amazon wants better astroturfing from the gig workers, those gig workers doing the actual work need to get a much bigger chunk of the money. They should unionize!

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 9 points 8 months ago

Damn it seems even PR firms that specializes in union busting have been enshittified too? Is nothing sacred?

[–] alnitak@yiffit.net 7 points 8 months ago

Sounds like they could use a union :p

[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 19 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The Amazon employee hired to do this and is trying to fight for unions secretly: :(

[–] Lath@kbin.social 17 points 8 months ago

They're even shafting their shills when it comes to paying a decent wage.

[–] Signtist@lemm.ee 7 points 8 months ago

There's no reason to try any harder than this. Most people who will see this tweet won't look at the handle or the replies - they're read the tweet, then move on. And if they see enough of these tweets, they may just internalize the notion that unions aren't worth it. It's better for Amazon to make more tweets than it is for them to make better tweets. And it's not like they're going to see any repercussions for trying to maliciously influence their employees.

[–] zarkanian@sh.itjust.works 2 points 8 months ago

Something similar happened when there were all of those news stories about abusive work environments at Amazon. Amazon employees spontaneously tweeting about how much they loved their jobs.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 161 points 8 months ago
[–] Diplomjodler@feddit.de 105 points 8 months ago

As a gay black man...

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 100 points 8 months ago (2 children)

My union dues are 1/52 of my yearly pay. I make $25.77 an hour in an entry level job with no education requirements. Minimum wage here is $16.55 an hour.

[–] RandomVideos@programming.dev 82 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You could have made -34.5% more without an union

Yeah you could have not bought like 5 xboxes instead

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 36 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Well you may be making 50k before taxes, but you're paying like a thousand dollars a year in union dues! You could instead be making 33k with no union dues, and a smaller tax burden. Think of how much you could buy with that extra thousand dollars!

On a side note are you hiring, and how far are you from Wichita, Kansas? I don't mind a commute

[–] minibyte@sh.itjust.works 71 points 8 months ago

This year because I’m a union member I get 3 paid sick days and a personal day extra, which would pay for my dues for the year twice.

[–] Sunforged@lemmy.ml 48 points 8 months ago
[–] anothercatgirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 33 points 8 months ago (1 children)

unions are trying to use the threat of a strike to increase worker wages so that fewer workers need to scrape by. We should have union loans that pay union dues until the wages are increased (by union activity), and then use part of the increased wages to pay off the loan.

[–] ShellMonkey@lemmy.socdojo.com 23 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

That's pretty well what a strike fund does. Dues get paid in, and paid out if a strike happens.

[–] anothercatgirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

no, I think a strike fund is different, a strike fund is like a collective savings account for union members to save up for a strike, while my idea prevents workers interested in unions but not interested in union dues from needing to pay union dues until after their wages are increased.

[–] ShellMonkey@lemmy.socdojo.com 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, but that starts to walk right up to the 'right to work' line, give me the benefits of a union shop without the responsibilities like voting, dues, or solidarity of action until later. If a union is in place you already have benefits of it most likely by having a guaranteed raise schedule or higher starting wages than you otherwise would. If it's just being established you'll have a vote, and if it gets established against your vote then that's just the way it is and you either join or leave.

The dues are integral towards the operation by funding things like a strike fund, hiring negotiators, or any other operational costs.

Think the other side of it, you get hired and floated a 'loan' until some later point. In the interim a strike is called. Are you going to walk out and expect pay from the union from a fund you haven't paid into?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Rinna@lemm.ee 25 points 8 months ago (1 children)

There is no war in Ba Sing Se

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 1 points 8 months ago

We are Ju-Di

[–] Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world 19 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Even the PFP is so obviously generated by thispersondoesnotexist.com lol

[–] tourist@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

They all have that unnatural looking direct camera stare with a vague background.

A lot of them share that exact same smile. Not sure how to describe it

Also feels like the camera is the exact same distance from every face.

I'm sure if you zoom in to the original pfp, you'll find the classic image artifacts. Probably even the website watermark.

Using an actual unlicensed shutterstock image would feel more authentic at this point.

[–] Xanis@lemmy.world 17 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Darla there reads like a coherent Trump.

Anyone wanna bet on it being a fake account meant to spread misleading information on unions, while appearing to be voicing legitimate concerns?

[–] THE_MASTERMIND@feddit.ch 33 points 8 months ago (1 children)

That is the whole point of this post.

[–] Xanis@lemmy.world 11 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Is it? Hahaha well, at least I'm on the same page. Can't catch them all. My bad.

[–] THE_MASTERMIND@feddit.ch 5 points 8 months ago

Yeah no worries

[–] Suburbanl3g3nd@lemmings.world 8 points 8 months ago

Unfortunately for "Darla", Amazon already pays her barely enough to scrape by. Before union dues. I'm fairly certain the union or the dues aren't the issues "Darla" should be voicing her concerns over.

[–] JimieWhales@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 8 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›