Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When Sears Flourished, So Did Workers. At Amazon, It’s More Complicated

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 149 posts

Re: When Sears Flourished, So Did Workers. At Amazon, It’s More Complicated

#21

Post by kibwen »

purple-again wrote: post #5

The sears salesmen directly drove revenue. He was being incentivized to increase revenue. The warehouse worker is not directly driving revenue at Amazon. The developers do...and they are being incentived to keep doing so. The world changed, business stayed the same.

According to the article, it would appear this was not limited to salespeople:

“Most of these people retired with a good pension,” said Jon White, who worked at Sears for 38 years, most recently as a manager in a store in Lithonia, Ga., before retiring in 2008. “Most of them are comfortable for the most part — cashiers, clerks, replenishers, all kinds of workers.”

I would assume that "replenishers" are directly analogous to current Amazon warehouse employees.

Re: When Sears Flourished, So Did Workers. At Amazon, It’s More Complicated

#22

Post by pm90 »

steve19 wrote: post #19
paulpauper wrote: post #17

Yeah I remember Bernie Sanders praised Amazon's decision in a tweet, but only later did people and the media realize that increasing the minimum wage came at a cost to other things, such as stock compensation. no free lunch guys.

Amazon realized that they kept getting a black eye because of their wages so of course they pivoted. Now some workers are probably worse off. I blame the media for only caring about sensationalist headlines.

What nonsense. Many thousands of workers will be compensated much better. Other retailers will have to increase their wages. This is a good outcome.

Re: When Sears Flourished, So Did Workers. At Amazon, It’s More Complicated

#23

Post by chrisseaton »

whoisjuan wrote: post #14

Sears' huge pension liabilities was cited as one of the main reasons that prevented any possible re-structuring that could have saved the company when it was declining and heading to bankruptcy... I mean, let's be realistic here. For how long was Sears in this pitiful state?... Getting all that real estate + semi-established brand was a private equity's wet dream, yet nobody ever contemplated that option. And now tha…

> thankfully the pension benefit guaranty is not funded with tax revenues

Who funds it then?

Re: When Sears Flourished, So Did Workers. At Amazon, It’s More Complicated

#25

Post by callalex »

kopo wrote: post #20
tinktank wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup, if you're interested in a recent example look at Mellanox vs Starboard capital. We need to break out of the vice-grip Wall Street has on public companies. The Long Term Stock Exchange is one such initiative but I think co-operatives are another way that should be popularized further. Problem is, it becomes really hard to capitalize without Wall Street money.

Wall Street money is just the money of 1%. The 1% need to get on board.

As well as every pension/retirement fund of the rest of us...

Re: When Sears Flourished, So Did Workers. At Amazon, It’s More Complicated

#26

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

whoisjuan wrote: post #14

Sears' huge pension liabilities was cited as one of the main reasons that prevented any possible re-structuring that could have saved the company when it was declining and heading to bankruptcy... I mean, let's be realistic here. For how long was Sears in this pitiful state?... Getting all that real estate + semi-established brand was a private equity's wet dream, yet nobody ever contemplated that option. And now tha…

I don’t necessarily disagree with many of your points, but I think drawing attention to the end of Sears’ lifecycle is an unfair thing. Someday Amazon too will have an end of life, and employees and shareholders will get fucked over then too.

The article also draws attention to how workers benefited _in good times_ at Sears, not near the end. And this is where the comparison is most meaningful, where Amazon is more questionable.

Re: When Sears Flourished, So Did Workers. At Amazon, It’s More Complicated

#27

Post by stella_r »

I joined Amazon as an SDE 1 in early 2015. I was promoted to an SDE 2 in q4 2016. I just was promoted this year to SDE 3.

Hard work, navigating to the right projects, and managing both upwards and down... senior and junior people on my part... I feel a bit ripped off. I'm not sure I would have wanted to get promoted knowing where my comp now falls.

The thing I'm unhappy about is that my target comp isn't actually that much more than where it already was as an SDE 2.

Without going into specific numbers, what Amazon does is if the stock value goes up, you only reap the benefits insofar as your existing grants are worth more. That means if you're above the target comp they assigned you, then you get no additional stock.

My job role as an SDE 3 has changed. I have more responsibilities and the influence I built as an SDE 2 has solidified. It's not easy by any means.

I'm going to just a bit longer as there is some initial vest that's wrapping up early next year... and then I go somewhere else.

My total comp this year is upwards of $250k because of the stock appreciation, but basically I got shafted with the promo raise. My salary and total comp didn't increase. I'm just reaping a higher stock price of vested shares.

Edit In response to the article >A warehouse worker hired now at Amazon who stays until retirement would leave with a fraction of that.

A buddy of mine works at the NYT in a tech role. NYT isn't doing anything different than Amazon. It takes a lot of nerve to write these kinds of articles... Hypocrisy at its finest.

Re: When Sears Flourished, So Did Workers. At Amazon, It’s More Complicated

#28

Post by jrmg »

stella_r wrote: post #27

I joined Amazon as an SDE 1 in early 2015. I was promoted to an SDE 2 in q4 2016. I just was promoted this year to SDE 3. Hard work, navigating to the right projects, and managing both upwards and down... senior and junior people on my part... I feel a bit ripped off. I'm not sure I would have wanted to get promoted knowing where my comp now falls. The thing I'm unhappy about is that my target comp isn't actually tha…

My total comp this year is upwards of $250k, but basically I got shafted

Only in our industry...

Re: When Sears Flourished, So Did Workers. At Amazon, It’s More Complicated

#29

Post by kopo »

callalex wrote: post #25
kopo wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wall Street money is just the money of 1%. The 1% need to get on board.

As well as every pension/retirement fund of the rest of us...

These are "Passive" investors. Wall Street doesn't care about them. Reality reflects it.

Re: When Sears Flourished, So Did Workers. At Amazon, It’s More Complicated

#30

Post by whoisjuan »

chrisseaton wrote: post #23
whoisjuan wrote: post #14

Sears' huge pension liabilities was cited as one of the main reasons that prevented any possible re-structuring that could have saved the company when it was declining and heading to bankruptcy... I mean, let's be realistic here. For how long was Sears in this pitiful state?... Getting all that real estate + semi-established brand was a private equity's wet dream, yet nobody ever contemplated that option. And now tha…

> thankfully the pension benefit guaranty is not funded with tax revenues Who funds it then?

Sponsors insurance premiums, revenue generating assets or flipped assets, factoring and general income investments.
Post reply on HN