Live data from Hacker News

What Amazon Does to Poor Cities

theatlantic.com

61–70 of 127 posts

Re: What Amazon Does to Poor Cities

#61
post #23

A common theme I see with these articles is how "grueling" the work is. People need some perspective on what grueling work is. I worked at a UPS hub during college, where I'd load, unload, and sort the contents of trailers. What they do seems pretty easy compared to what I did at UPS. Picking and packing orders is a lot less grueling than unloading trailers full of 60 pound paper boxes, or loading hundreds of package…

The reason it doesn't command much pay is not because it doesn't require much skill. It's because either there are more people willing to do that job that doesn't require much skill, or there are fewer jobs available to those that don't have skills (in a given area).

[deleted]

Re: What Amazon Does to Poor Cities

#62
Amazon Fulfillment centers are cold calling cell phones with employment advertising. That's a $1,500 fine _per call_ under the TCPA. These poor people shouldn't apply to work for pay, they should contact a lawyer and get paid. Amazon is flagrantly breaking the law. Easy money.

Re: What Amazon Does to Poor Cities

#63
Amazon (and other companies) should just leave these ungrateful areas. I mean, San Bernardino should be thanking Amazon but instead they are complaining. Once the big companies threaten to leave and ignite a race to the bottom, these cities will come back crawling on their knees begging for jobs, any jobs.

It's not like worker are going to politically unite and retaliate. All (both) the political parties are controlled by 1%. Any popular movement is either squashed (Bernie) or appropriated (Trump) by this moneyed elite. Unions too are successfully stigmatized and restricted legislatively ("right to work").

Re: What Amazon Does to Poor Cities

#64
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon is already working to fully automate these warehouses. Actions that increase the cost of labor will simply accelerate this process.

Actions that increase the cost of labor will take big chunks out of their profit margins. Amazon will respond to this threat by telling agitated investors to calm down because they have a plan to automate every human out of existence by the year 2025. Unsophisticated investors are appeased by the tasty kool aid. Sometimes the general public will drink it too and react with downvotes thrown at the people hinting that…

Anyone betting against warehouse automation should review their investment strategy. The process is well underway.

Re: What Amazon Does to Poor Cities

#65
post #23

A common theme I see with these articles is how "grueling" the work is. People need some perspective on what grueling work is. I worked at a UPS hub during college, where I'd load, unload, and sort the contents of trailers. What they do seems pretty easy compared to what I did at UPS. Picking and packing orders is a lot less grueling than unloading trailers full of 60 pound paper boxes, or loading hundreds of package…

I don't think physical labor is a big deal -- indeed us computer-and-desk workers think a lot about how to stay active -- and I don't take that to be the crux of the article at all.

In fact, I'm surprised that none of the comments here have yet mentioned what I see as the worst, and tangibly different aspect of Amazon warehouse work: the gamification of the tasks.

> blue bars on the scanner count down the amount of time they have left to complete the task

> the company constantly sends messages to workers’ scanners telling them to work faster

> without warning, Amazon changed the amount of time workers had to stow an item from six minutes to four minutes and 12 seconds

This sound absolutely terrible. This would make any normal task stressful. The randomized changes and constant oversight strike me as borderline abuse/interrogation techniques. And while the article doesn't dig into it, I assume this is driven by AMZL software systems, operating on a global scale (using all workers and all warehouses as inputs), with machine-learning algorithms constantly tweaking the timers and count-down bars, and possibly even suggesting to managers "hey, worker A has slowed down in the past 15 minutes, would you like to send this pre-written message X to A? Tap [Yes] [No]". This sort of thing might sound like a brilliant idea to some rockstar developer in Seattle, and to the data science team, and the management team signing off, when in reality it creates a Hunger Games race-to-the-bottom mentality in your actual workforce.

And this is materially different from how Stater Brothers across the street operates (or any other warehouse job), presumably.

Re: What Amazon Does to Poor Cities

#66
post #6

I feel like journalists are just trying every way possible to create an anti-tech sentiment. Crazy how fast things can change from all hail the tech titans to oh these tech companies are creating a dystopia. Theres way too much noise in every aspect of information these days to help society focus on the problems that actually matter.

The article is another iteration of https://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-eth... . OP is unable to find any evidence that Amazon makes the problems worse, aside from innuendo, but since Amazon is there, now it's their fault.

Re: What Amazon Does to Poor Cities

#67
post #14

These Amazon jobs are most useful to think about by comparison. Four decades ago, analogous jobs (manual labor, no college degree) were in the car industry: at Ford and GM. Those jobs were good middle-class jobs with good salaries. On those jobs, one could raise a family with a 40 hour work week, and do very well working 50-60 hours a week. Today, the similar jobs are in Amazon warehouses. What is different? A big on…

> What is different?

That those jobs aren't reserved for a subset of the population (mostly white males).

Also, I think you're thinking more like 5-6 decades ago, the US car industry wasn't doing so hot in 1978.

Re: What Amazon Does to Poor Cities

#68
post #55
post #23

A common theme I see with these articles is how "grueling" the work is. People need some perspective on what grueling work is. I worked at a UPS hub during college, where I'd load, unload, and sort the contents of trailers. What they do seems pretty easy compared to what I did at UPS. Picking and packing orders is a lot less grueling than unloading trailers full of 60 pound paper boxes, or loading hundreds of package…

The thing with fulfillment center work is, you tend to do one specific job all the time. If you stow, pick, move carts around, move stuff from a cart onto a conveyor belt, you do that all day, every day, until you're told to do something else. Even though many jobs might not be "grueling," at least in warehouses where the inventory tends to be lightweight, the repetition and requirement to meet rate will ensure that…

Disclaimer: I work at an Amazon delivery station and briefly worked at a FC prior.

From my experience the managers at my warehouse are very open to moving people around to fill different roles if you request it. This is obviously anecdotal but from my experience people tend to want to stick to one specific job rather than move around.

Re: What Amazon Does to Poor Cities

#69
post #23

A common theme I see with these articles is how "grueling" the work is. People need some perspective on what grueling work is. I worked at a UPS hub during college, where I'd load, unload, and sort the contents of trailers. What they do seems pretty easy compared to what I did at UPS. Picking and packing orders is a lot less grueling than unloading trailers full of 60 pound paper boxes, or loading hundreds of package…

Grueling is one issue. Financial security is another.

Not knowing if your manager will give you 4 or 40 hours is stressful.

Amazon measures everything. Their incentive compensation plans should be rewarding employees that exceed quota with daily bonuses.

One-year of tenure should not be required to qualify for basic benefits.

In short, these employees need to unionize and collectively bargain.

Re: What Amazon Does to Poor Cities

#70
I wish the article talked more about what Amazon and other companies can do to better invest in their communities and employees: how they can train employees for advancement, how they can proactively recognize and nurture talent instead of churning and burning through workers, how they support the community to attract better jobs and help more people, etc. it presents unionization as the only solution. I worry that unionization might increase the cost of labor and just push jobs elsewhere.

Perhaps I'm naive, but how hard would it be for Amazon to really commit to investing in its workforce and community rather than just strategizing to avoid unionisation? The article states they invest in schools in whatnot, but are they just doing this for political points or actually dedicated to investing in the workforce / community and helping its workers grow?

Post reply on HN