Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
so I guess no one can prove that it ISN’T union busting, then, either, hm?

The world doesn’t work that way, Louie.

You don’t just get to say “no one can prove” easily observed things.

Projections, all projections. Does this store have a history of causing union-initiated problems with management?

If this store had only 12 people coming in a day, and Apple had closed it, the union would still play the same shame game and deny that the contract does not protect the employee, but that Apple is taking advantage of the situation. Apple is following the contract, and until someone provides proof of union busting, the claim is nothing but unfounded.

The bottom line is that the store is closed, those employees are off the payroll, and the IAM will negotiate a better contract with Apple next time.
 
Last edited:
Malls are dying
Not sure everyone, especially those not from the United States, knows what "declining conditions" at malls means. It's not just because people don't go there anymore.
Not all malls are struggling


 
  • Like
Reactions: AppleEnthusiast1995
Not all malls are struggling


“There are roughly 900 malls in the United States, but only a small sliver are successful. ”

That was in the ‘The Good’ portion of the article.

They referenced Netflix House in Dallas as a positive sign. I’ve been to that Galleria. It’s as dead as it’s ever been, and one of the major anchors, Nordstrom’s, just closed a few weeks ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dlachausse
The UFCW or Teamsters unions would have likely bargained better CBA language . The IAM is not a retail store union, nor are the industries on its "about us" portion of the IAM website retail oriented industries.

The fact that two other non union stores are closing at the same time points to the likely lackluster performance of all 3 locations .

Not only that, there are other Apple retail options in Baltimore, such as several Best Buy locations and Microcenter. The latter store has a very good Apple department. It is 4.4 miles away from the Towson Mall, but a nicer location in my opinion, just off the Baltimore Beltway.
 
Won't get into the union topic, but retail overall has been dying a slow death for years. The Apple stores that anchor in an indoor mall are the most vulnerable. Where I live there are about 4 locations under 25 miles away, most are relatively busy still but the shops around them are slowly shutting their doors.

Unless you have a special order/config there is really little benefit to buying directly from Apple. Best Buy and Amazon routinely offers discounts and special financing terms when Apple never puts their inventory on sale.
 
Projections, all projections. Does this store have a history of causing union-initiated problems with management?

If this store had only 12 people coming in a day, and Apple had closed it, the union would still play the same shame game and deny that the contract does not protect the employee, but that Apple is taking advantage of the situation. Apple is following the contract, and until someone provides proof of union busting, the claim is nothing but unfounded.

The bottom line is that the store is closed, those employees are off the payroll, and the IAM will negotiate a better contract with Apple next time.
That's not what the psychological concept of projection means, buddy.

Back to reality - the store had a lot more than 12 people coming in a day.

I'm not sure the purpose of your hypothetical when the very real situation... actually happened?

"Bottom line is" Apple is the richest company in the history of human civilization, and every single person who is employed by them is (read: should be) entitled to the stability afforded to the most affluent in society. Anything less is unfair exploitation, and you should question your motives in supporting it.
 
1. I live very close to the Trumbull location and yes, the mall has very few visitors compared to 10 years ago. In fact, it's hard for me to make this claim because I (and basically everyone I know over the age of 20) have no NEED to go to a mall...I can buy (and return for free if needed) practically anything I would want ONLINE from Amazon or Walmart or Target. Yes, I will go to a store if I am looking for clothing or possibly a tool...something that needs to be touched (does this drill feel solid? Is this shirt too scratchy/clingy/too small/different color than what I thought/etc.) I don't think this mall is in trouble as it has some decent stores and restaurants, however, again, who NEEDS to go to a mall anymore other than the rare purchase situation?

2. I don't think Apple necessarily has a retail problem...but the Apple Stores feel more like Phone Stores...tons of iPhones in every flavor and color yet far fewer accessories (like bluetooth stuff) than years past...few iMacs...Mac Pros are gone...displays are gone...iPods are gone (but basically replaced with iPhones). Apple stores (at least in CT) just feel like all Apple sells are phones. Even if I'm biased here, go back to point #1...all this Apple stuff can be ordered online anywhere, delivered in 1-3 days all year long, and I don't have to drive 30+ mins to an Apple store, possibly deal with parking, wait to buy the thing, then drive 30 mins home. Online is super convenient.

3. It would be very interesting to see why people are going into an Apple Store these days. My bet is a a)lot of online order pickups, b)primarily iPhones browsing and some Watch browsing (due to all the different bands). Then, what are people actually purchasing?
 
Malls have faded to the past. The only place for Apple stores is really touristy places in big cities. I try to visit them when I travel around the world. Always fun. I'm heading to Tokyo for the first time and I'm guessing they have a store I'll visit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NetMage
Took two of my kids this morning to Apple Store Haywood Mall for Apple camp. I worked there 15 years ago when it first opened and was always busy, and still today whenever I go it seems to be bustling.
However, there was also a shooting at this same mall last Saturday.
I live in Anderson, which is much smaller than Greenville, and it’s a miracle our mall is still open. But when I do go to the mall in Greenville, I’m a little sad to see some of the same signs. The building for Sears is still empty after several years, and a few of the smaller stores are beginning to be occupied with businesses that don’t seem to last very long.
I’m sad that my kids will never see malls like they were in season three of Stranger Things, the good ol Star Court mall
 
  • Like
Reactions: NetMage
So, the Union wants ‘equal treatment’ when that favors them, but they want Apple to adhere to the contract when that is in the Union’s favor. That is not how contracts work 🙄

It may be that a lack of union experience led to a bad agreement with the company at the time.
It seems the workers gave the company complete power to get rid of them, and Apple has a habit of getting rid of anything its executives don't like.

Typical Union B.S. ... they almost always make out like they are the victims. When you have a union, there is no 'equal treatment'; working and employment conditions are negotiated. Apple is meeting the conditions of the contract that the Union negotiated for, and the union members signed.

I know this is going to turn into a pro-union / anti-union discussion as always. But regardless of that, one thing sticks out to me:

Somebody did not write a very good contract. Whether Apple intentionally had that clause put in there and then used it at the first opportunity, or a union negotiator thought that sounded like a good idea....it wasn't. It sounds poorly written.

IF Apple closes this store and then IF they open another store within 50 miles? Surely they could have come up with something better than that.

Exactly. I remember when this store first unionized, that this exact situation seemed to be something they were already aware of.

Which is why I'm surprised all around. Surely the union and those workers knew this was likely. This was the main thing they wanted protection from.

Yet it happened the way it was always going to anyway.
Okay but what does the contract actually say? The Union claim is that it requires equal treatment, of which this would be a violation of. It may be that the contract requires the *option* of severance if a new store doesn’t open within 50 miles, not that it requires only offering severance.
 
Okay but what does the contract actually say? The Union claim is that it requires equal treatment, of which this would be a violation of. It may be that the contract requires the *option* of severance if a new store doesn’t open within 50 miles, not that it requires only offering severance.

I do not know that any of us here have seen the contract, and I doubt the IAM would willingly hand any of us a copy. But who knows?

"Equal treatment", in my days in a union, always meant that all employees were treated the same in a union shop. In short, the boss should not give you and me a miniature screwdriver unless the boss also gives everyone else one. That is an actual example that happened in my shop when our boss returned from a field trip with manufacturing reps, who gave him two screwdrivers. When he entered the door, he handed them to the first two people he saw. Another union member got enraged and filed a grievance about unfair and unequal treatment. They bought him a screwdriver.

Severance pay is given for termination that is caused by company actions, such as a reduction in force, for any reason. Severance pay usually comes with stipulations that depend on what was bargained for. Apparently, in this case, the employees get severance pay, plus the chance at first refusal for a position in any new store opened within 50 miles, and 18 months. The contract, apparently, is not written so that the store closure automatically guarantees employees positions at other open stores.

I became quite good at understanding contract language and interpreting contracts. We had contracts that built upon each previous contract. Plus, as there were mergers and acquisitions and union members from other unions joining the group, there were a lot of LOAs and MOUs attached to each contract. As this was, as far as I know, the first contract for this Apple store, the contract was probably very easy to read and interpret. I would love to see a copy, but I am certain I will never get that chance.

Thus, if what we know about the contract is correct, the employees have no reason to expect equal treatment with respect to other unionized or non-union stores. Their treatment, so it appears, is based on a CBA that stipulates severance and a right of first refusal.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NetMage
so I guess no one can prove that it ISN’T union busting, then, either, hm?

The world doesn’t work that way, Louie.

You don’t just get to say “no one can prove” easily observed things.
The things one can observe....
1. Towson Town Center is in decline, with 26% of stores vacant and more closing, reduced foot traffic, and ongoing safety/crime concerns contributing to a lower shopper activity.
2. The union and Apple negotiated the contract terms. From signing to closure announcement there were no NLRB filings, press reports or union statements alleging Apple violated the contract.

On the other hand, Apple is holding firm on the negotiated contract terms for a reason.
 
People should ask AT&T corporate employees how well a union in a dying retail environment works out.

Last I checked:

- There have been massive layoffs over the years.
- The union stewards are useless during counselings.
- Corporate stores are still being spun off into authorized retail in huge numbers.
- Commission structures have lower payouts than they used to have.

It's not like Apple employees are police officers or teachers. They have no bargaining power. Apple wouldn't face any type of repercussions if a store closes. Whippee! Now they don't have to pay rent, employees, or for insurance. Apple could literally close all of their stores and reap the savings and still make the same amount of money. Difference is, society NEEDS police officers and teachers. Society doesn't need Apple retail store employees.
 
The UFCW or Teamsters unions would have likely bargained better CBA language . The IAM is not a retail store union, nor are the industries on its "about us" portion of the IAM website retail oriented industries.

The fact that two other non union stores are closing at the same time points to the likely lackluster performance of all 3 locations .

Not only that, there are other Apple retail options in Baltimore, such as several Best Buy locations and Microcenter. The latter store has a very good Apple department. It is 4.4 miles away from the Towson Mall, but a nicer location in my opinion, just off the Baltimore Beltway.
Why would a food union or the Teamsters represent Apple retail employees? They don't represent those types of industries.
 
Okay but what does the contract actually say? The Union claim is that it requires equal treatment, of which this would be a violation of. It may be that the contract requires the *option* of severance if a new store doesn’t open within 50 miles, not that it requires only offering severance.

I don't know, and I don't know that the exact text is public.

I am pretty sure though that they will sue if any letter of the contract was violated.

So we'll see.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.