VW _wanted_ a union in TN.

> This vote was no because if it had been yes the likely consequence would have been all the voters being out of a job.

Isn't that a problem?

Maybe. Maybe not. Let's take for the sake the argument that yes, it's a problem.

Should Amazon be prevented from closing the factory? For how long? Do they have to send as much product there as they did before? Can they open a non-union warehouse in Columbus, MS less than two hours away? Any temporary/sunsetting requirements just get factored in to the new math of how much a union would cost them. So maybe you buy the workers six months but the same thing happens. So if you actually want to "fix" things (again, from the assumed standpoint that shutting down the factory is a Bad Thing) the requirement has to be permanent. So is the requirement then that Amazon has to keep this one warehouse open in perpetuity just because its unionized? What if Amazon goes bankrupt? What if Amazon sells its fulfillment and shipping components to another company? What if that company buys everything except this one warehouse?

The argument of "they shouldn't be able to close the factory" falls apart pretty quickly when you think of how you would have to enforce it.

Maybe. But it’s not some deep mystery why the vote was no. All the threads and sub threads discussing it as if it were a deep mystery puzzle me. I’m always bemused at smart people with strong opinions on subjects where they don’t even have a grasp of the basic factual landscape.