Software workers labor union sues Klarna over layoffs of 700(tellerreport.com)
tellerreport.com
Software workers labor union sues Klarna over layoffs of 700
https://www.tellerreport.com/news/2022-12-14-the-union-is-suing-klarna-in-the-labor-court.r1b40rP_i.html
44 comments
Klarna is a just a predatory loan shark with an app.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2021-08-11/sleek-new-...
Companies like this exist only due to massive financial ignorance.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2021-08-11/sleek-new-...
Companies like this exist only due to massive financial ignorance.
This comment thread doesn’t feel very relevant to the OP.
I think the business proposition from klarna is two things:
1. They have an ongoing relationship with the customers and that allows checkout/payment to be an easier process for customers. If the process is easier customers will be more likely to go through it. This is a big advantage Amazon has from just knowing your details. It also makes Klarna’s business look better to have this relationship with customers and they can maybe offer services too, eg seeing recent purchases in an app.
2. Lots of people like to buy things on credit. This isn’t new. Like credit cards before, Klarna allows people to buy on credit without the store needing to administer all their customers credit accounts. It also means the store can make sales to people who would only buy on credit. I think Klarna compete on price to merchants with credit cards here.
I guess there’s some argument to be made that no one should be allowed to buy things on credit but I think that’s pretty bad for lots of people. I guess you’d want restrictions on how badly one may suffer from failing to make payments and maybe that BNPL providers should better guess whether customers can afford things. I think that would be reasonable. It feels to me that the current incentives are for the cost of risk of late/non-repayment to go mostly into fees for late payers rather than an interest rate or fees to the merchant. Though if you look at credit cards, there’s a pretty big stratification by how likely people are to be good for the money and how wealthy they are in general. That feels like an important difference – klarna offers the same deal to everyone and maybe doesn’t think about affordability but your bank offers different rates/limits to different people. On the other hand those limits mightn’t help much as people get terrible care debt too.
I think the business proposition from klarna is two things:
1. They have an ongoing relationship with the customers and that allows checkout/payment to be an easier process for customers. If the process is easier customers will be more likely to go through it. This is a big advantage Amazon has from just knowing your details. It also makes Klarna’s business look better to have this relationship with customers and they can maybe offer services too, eg seeing recent purchases in an app.
2. Lots of people like to buy things on credit. This isn’t new. Like credit cards before, Klarna allows people to buy on credit without the store needing to administer all their customers credit accounts. It also means the store can make sales to people who would only buy on credit. I think Klarna compete on price to merchants with credit cards here.
I guess there’s some argument to be made that no one should be allowed to buy things on credit but I think that’s pretty bad for lots of people. I guess you’d want restrictions on how badly one may suffer from failing to make payments and maybe that BNPL providers should better guess whether customers can afford things. I think that would be reasonable. It feels to me that the current incentives are for the cost of risk of late/non-repayment to go mostly into fees for late payers rather than an interest rate or fees to the merchant. Though if you look at credit cards, there’s a pretty big stratification by how likely people are to be good for the money and how wealthy they are in general. That feels like an important difference – klarna offers the same deal to everyone and maybe doesn’t think about affordability but your bank offers different rates/limits to different people. On the other hand those limits mightn’t help much as people get terrible care debt too.
Their "pay later" function is an interest-free loan, so not sure you can call them loan sharks. If you meant that the loans with missed payments get sent to collections and the customers' credit score takes a hit — isn't that how all credit works?
That was before
https://www.finder.com/klarna
s. Interest on late payments. If you don't pay off the balance by the end of your billing month, Klarna starts charging you 19.99% interest on average.
https://www.finder.com/klarna
s. Interest on late payments. If you don't pay off the balance by the end of your billing month, Klarna starts charging you 19.99% interest on average.
[deleted]
Na, they exist because they made checkout convenient. I never have to register anywhere anymore. Just type my email address and my info is filled in automatically. I don't have to get my card out and type in the numbers, Klarna will just bill me. And as long as I pay the bill on time (which I always do) this won't cost me anything extra.
I mean, I don't really like Klarna on principle and they seem to have a pretty whacky corp culture, but one has to admit it's convenient.
I mean, I don't really like Klarna on principle and they seem to have a pretty whacky corp culture, but one has to admit it's convenient.
Don’t you get the same things from PayPal / Apple Pay / web browser remembering details or whatever?
Don't know. They're not popular over here.
Edit: the web browser thing can be pretty spotty in my experience and to my memory I almost feel like Klarna predates it?
Edit: the web browser thing can be pretty spotty in my experience and to my memory I almost feel like Klarna predates it?
I don’t know the details, but it seems they also provide web shop owners with some sort of service that is better than other payment processors. In Sweden, it seems like every web shop there is uses Klarna for payment processing, even if you pay up front.
Swedish damages are usually very small compared to the astronomical sums you see from the US, but I agree that suing for a million SEK seems barely worth the trouble...
Swedish damages are usually very small compared to the astronomical sums you see from the US, but I agree that suing for a million SEK seems barely worth the trouble...
Or the systemic issues that make people need access to these loans.
Most people use these to buy products that they likely can't afford. This isn't systemic issues, this is people wanting things that they can't afford given their income and wealth.
The systemic issue if failure of public education on basic math and finance.
0% interest loans and a $10 late fee is not the same thing as being a loan shark.
Klarna's late fee caps out at $24 for orders over $200.
Klarna's late fee caps out at $24 for orders over $200.
Sorry that changed
https://www.finder.com/klarna
Interest on late payments. If you don't pay off the balance by the end of your billing month, Klarna starts charging you 19.99% interest on average.
https://www.finder.com/klarna
Interest on late payments. If you don't pay off the balance by the end of your billing month, Klarna starts charging you 19.99% interest on average.
Where are they seeing the 19.99%?
>Please note, missed payments incur late fees and unpaid debts are sent to debt collection.
https://www.klarna.com/au/customer-service/what-happens-if-i...
>Please note, missed payments incur late fees and unpaid debts are sent to debt collection.
https://www.klarna.com/au/customer-service/what-happens-if-i...
Every time I see an online shop suggesting me to use klarna to pay for something it would be a tremendously stupid financial decision.
But it’s good that this exists. Darwinism and all that.
But it’s good that this exists. Darwinism and all that.
That's not at all how Darwinism works, because a.) everyone with a similar lack of financial means & education would be liable to make similar mistakes, and b.) Klarna (or anyone else) preying on these people does not reduce the incidence of people who lack means and financial know how (if anything, it increases it).
This is a set of ideas called Social Darwinism, and if you look into it's history, you may not like the company you're keeping, so to speak.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism
This is a set of ideas called Social Darwinism, and if you look into it's history, you may not like the company you're keeping, so to speak.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Darwinism
Slogan: a Social Darwinist is someone haunted by the notion that the "unfit" are outbreeding the "fit".
Not only it's such a mean thing to say, you're also tremendously wrong. Poor people have more kids.
>it would be a tremendously stupid financial decision.
Since the value of a dollar decreases over time it is not a stupid financial decision to pay for things with 0% APR loans.
Since the value of a dollar decreases over time it is not a stupid financial decision to pay for things with 0% APR loans.
It was more like: if you have to pay for an iPhone over 18 months, you can’t afford it. You are a mess, in six months you won’t be able to pay anymore, and you will end up owing much more than the iPhone costs.
What if you can afford it but it's 0%?
I’ve (in Europe) only seen Klarna offer pay in 30 days. So that hypothetical doesn’t actually exist.
They’re suing for less than a $100,000 according to the article. This doesn’t even make sense
According to another source, it's a "unusually large amount", not sure if that's true or not, seems really small to me.
Automatic translation via DeepL:
> We are suing Klarna for an unusually large amount of damages. This is due to the fact that the lawsuit concerns a large number of members," says Martin Wästfelt, head of negotiations, in the press release.
https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/unionen-stammer-klarna-i-...
Automatic translation via DeepL:
> We are suing Klarna for an unusually large amount of damages. This is due to the fact that the lawsuit concerns a large number of members," says Martin Wästfelt, head of negotiations, in the press release.
https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/unionen-stammer-klarna-i-...
Just wanted to say the translation is correct. I can't say whether it's unusual or not. I follow labor news closely (Arbetaren, Arbetet, etc.), but I can't remember any case similar to this in recent history. It's pretty rare Unionen does anything though, as they're half-way to a company union compared to the others, so maybe it is indeed unusually large for them.
It says over one million kroner, so potentially a lot more than that. It’s possible they don’t want to reveal the amount at the moment?
This seems to be straight from the labor union doing the suing:
> The Union sues Klarna in the Labour Court (AD) for SEK 1 300 000
https://www.unionen.se/pressmeddelande/3336818
So around 124K USD or 117K EUR. Not that much more.
> The Union sues Klarna in the Labour Court (AD) for SEK 1 300 000
https://www.unionen.se/pressmeddelande/3336818
So around 124K USD or 117K EUR. Not that much more.
Thanks! That’s quite disappointing :(
It seems to be less than Klarna makes in an hour, before expenses.
> The trade union Unionen is suing Klarna in the Labor Court for over one million kroner
1M Kroner is roughly nearly $100K which is nothing for Klarna, So:
> We are suing Klarna for an unusually large amount of damages.
Makes absolutely no sense. Especially when Klarna has lost over 90% of its valuation from $45B to $6.7bn.
1M Kroner is roughly nearly $100K which is nothing for Klarna, So:
> We are suing Klarna for an unusually large amount of damages.
Makes absolutely no sense. Especially when Klarna has lost over 90% of its valuation from $45B to $6.7bn.
One million kroner is about 96000 USD.
Over one million also is infinity, we currently only know its more than 96000 so not very useful when we don’t know how close to it it is.