Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

reuters.com

121–130 of 210 posts

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#121
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That wouldn't be the news headline, though. The customer would find out about the cost increase via an article titled something like "Amazon increases prices by up to 20%, are your favourite purchases affected?". I'm with you though, it costs the consumer nothing.

This could be addressed by having more labor-conscious journalists and headline writers. Framing it that way, of course people would respond negatively to price increases. "Amazon workers now paid for all the time they're clocked in, prices may be affected" is a lot more sympathetic to workers.

I feel like they're labor conscious they just don't give a fuck or are actively opposed.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#122

It sounds like the post-shift screening shouldn't be necessary. If they're not paying you, you should be free to go. The worker should try opting-out of the screening: it should be an OSHA issue if you can't freely leave the building at anytime.

The screenings are to prevent people from stealing things. There is no OSHA problem, you can leave the building through fire exits at any time, but they will set off alarms.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#123

Is it not crazy that is has to come down to a Supreme Court case for Jeff Bezos and Amazon to treat their employees fairly? This isn't a company that's on a sink or swim margin where this will collapse the company. Not when they're fine stocking all the break rooms in corporate offices with starbucks and AWS people get shelves full snacks all day. But give an hourly employee a little more money to accommodate their s…

I do not know where you get these ideas from. Working for Amazon as a white collar guy also nothing like working for Google or any other company in California. The save money on you wherever they can. This includes getting shitty used laptops as your first device, not having extra monitors, working on a door desk, and so on.

https://blog.aboutamazon.com/working-at-amazon/how-a-door-be...

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#124
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get what you're saying, but these are the ways that management finds the margins that allow you to receive cheap products on your doorstep in 2 days.

this would cost the customer an extra penny, maybe a nickel?

The Coalition of Immokalee Workers famously used this argument as part of their campaign for farmworkers. The argument was that fast food companies paying 1 cent more per lb. for their tomatoes would have a huge benefit for the workers picking the tomatoes, and they won.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#125
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Sure you are free to go. And don't bother showing up tomorrow."

If everyone started refusing, they might be willing to change policy. That much overturn at once could be problematic.

HN re-inventing unions is one of my favourite memes ;).

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#126

I find the this whole wage debate rather interesting, because it is not only an extremely misunderstood issue, at the same times as it is a core measure of the condition of society (Please do not confuse that with a notion of "health", but rather the objective "condition" of the society, also not just the economy) The ideal state of any economy is one in which balance of opportunities exists to the point where an equ…

This is called the single lump of labor fallacy otherwise known as the brown people are coming for my job. In your interpretation there is a finite or relatively nonelastic number of jobs and importing a bunch of people drives down the cost by substantially inflating supply. There are multiple problems with this thought. The imports are in many relatively low paying sectors already an expected part of the market and…

And here we are, utterly ignorant and navel gazing self-serving excuse making, couched in lazy thinking.

You did quite a good job of covering almost every single fallacy, including the gaslighting fake fallacy. You even covered the propaganda excuse of the noble savage you racist types never fail to trot out because you think the USA is more deserving of the "children start operations like Google" than the originating countries and societies as you drain their potential and use the exceptions of starting Google as an excuse for exploiting and sabotaging the originating countries.

You can use that racist self-righteous snark somewhere else, but reality does not change facts, no matter how much you simply parrot the gaslighting propaganda of the ruling class that loves it when self-righteous useful fools like you get all adamant about spreading their propaganda for them. It's really no different than any other propaganda hack of any other ruling class serving tools. You're no different than the Chinese hacks that are encouraged to spread the same level of pro-CCP nonsense; just as self-righteous and just as big of a fool.

There are no problems with my thought any more than when CCP propaganda spreading hacks try to gaslight people like you do.

It's embarrassing that you would even use such a lazy argument as "Americans may not be willing to work". Even your subconscious knows that it's utter nonsense, hence your use of "may". Reality is that Americans do not want to work for slave analogue wages; as was clearly evident when ICE raided the plant in the south that left the company having to hire local American workers that were then also paid higher wages.

And no, people who are not hypocritical, would have no problem paying higher wages for groceries, which would also lead to lower profits of the companies producing them, because they have to pay workers living wages, which allows them to make more money that it will cost them to buy more expensive groceries. Again, such utterly lazy and shallow lack of any thought.

I come here hoping for intelligence, yet there is little to be found.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get what you're saying, but these are the ways that management finds the margins that allow you to receive cheap products on your doorstep in 2 days.

Not sure why you’re being downvoted here (maybe a misunderstanding of what you’re trying to say?) My takeaway from your comment is that we should first look to our own hypocrisy, i.e. we’re quick to post a comment about Amazon’s unfair labor practices, but we’re just a little quicker to click on that free 2-day prime shipping button.

What is hypocritical about that?

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#128
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two day shipping of cheap products justify not paying employees for their time? Wtf?

I don't agree with it, but two day shipping is the silver bullet that separates Amazon from the competition. I don't hear these stories about Walmart or Costco's warehouses, clearly there's something about the way Amazon does business that causes these problems.

Sam's Club (Walmart) != Costco

Please refer to this documentary about Walmart. They're not just anti-labor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wal-Mart:_The_High_Cost_of_Low...

While Walmart didn't invent bad behavior, they're pretty good at it.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#129

I find the this whole wage debate rather interesting, because it is not only an extremely misunderstood issue, at the same times as it is a core measure of the condition of society (Please do not confuse that with a notion of "health", but rather the objective "condition" of the society, also not just the economy) The ideal state of any economy is one in which balance of opportunities exists to the point where an equ…

[flagged]

Re: U.S. Supreme Court rejects Amazon warehouse worker wage appeal

#130
post #11
post #4

So, trying to follow the sequence of thrown out and overturned, it seems like now it would be going all the way back down to the original court that threw out the lawsuit to go forward? Seems crazy that it's taking this long to settle the question. Tangentially it seems crazy they're not required to pay for the time spent going through security. If they're paid hourly and not free to go they're still on the job.

The current court is often rejecting cases that they feel are more the responsibility of the legislature to resolve. I had heard an opinion on this that the court thought it was the problem of Congress to fix this NOT the court.

I'd feel much better about that if there was a way for the court to guarantee the question would be addressed by the legislature where as right now they usually just continue to exist in the grey area status quo.
Post reply on HN