31–40 of 399 posts
I wonder what their recruiting team thinks about these moves by the company. I know I will not work for Amazon seeing how the manage dissent at the company and I’m sure there are many other people who feel the same.
I wonder what their recruiting team thinks about these moves by the company. I know I will not work for Amazon seeing how the manage dissent at the company and I’m sure there are many other people who feel the same.
> “We support every employee’s right to criticize their employer’s working conditions, but that does not come with blanket immunity against any and all internal policies,” Herdener said. > Amazon’s external communications policy prohibits employees from commenting publicly on its business without corporate justification and approval from executives. Herdener previously said the policy did not allow employees to “publ…
Amazon is firing them for commenting publicly on its business. If you were employed by a company and disparaged them publicly, breaking company policy, would you believe that your employment with them is in any way protected?
That’s not to say I disagree with workers’ protections only tat if you believe strongly then protections or not should not be much of a consideration.
That said, is Amazon acting illegally so you’re calling that out or do I just disagree with their position?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't you feel a little...silly...making accusations about something that you haven't even looked at? WaPo did not "stress that they violated company policies". There are two short sentences in the middle of the article about Amazon's reason for firing, followed by a disclaimer that Bezos owns WaPo. Much more of the article is devoted to the fired employees belief that she was fired for her climate change activism, a…
I think it's a little silly to take an article that's critical of Amazon seriously when the paper is owned by Jeff Bezos. There are plenty of other sources on the topic including the Reuters article above, which is not behind a paywall.
I'd totally support the employees if they got fired or even cautioned for exercising their free speech rights. Amazon needs to get penalized if that's the case. Where it gets into the gray zone is when employees misuse company property and time to engage in activism. Like the Google Employee who used her access privileges to distribute messages supporting her position. Personally I think we should draw a clear line b…
Just to be very clear: I am in no way agreeing with Amazon, just correcting a confusion about the applicability of the US Constitution and amendments.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amazon is firing them for commenting publicly on its business. If you were employed by a company and disparaged them publicly, breaking company policy, would you believe that your employment with them is in any way protected?
Here’s my take. If I think a company is doing wrong and I believe I should stand against it, I would then consider that taking a stand will likely result in termination; but if I believe strongly then I’d do it because of principle not be cause a law is protecting me. That’s not to say I disagree with workers’ protections only tat if you believe strongly then protections or not should not be much of a consideration.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't you feel a little...silly...making accusations about something that you haven't even looked at? WaPo did not "stress that they violated company policies". There are two short sentences in the middle of the article about Amazon's reason for firing, followed by a disclaimer that Bezos owns WaPo. Much more of the article is devoted to the fired employees belief that she was fired for her climate change activism, a…
I think it's a little silly to take an article that's critical of Amazon seriously when the paper is owned by Jeff Bezos. There are plenty of other sources on the topic including the Reuters article above, which is not behind a paywall.
That wasn't the question. The fact is that you felt comfortable asserting a certain tone in the article that you admittedly didn't even read, and then the article didn't even have that tone.
You're moving the goalposts now by just saying you should blanket not accept any WaPo reporting about Amazon. Which is fine. But that wasn't your original claim.
What exactly does a UX designer know about the working conditions of an Amazon warehouse that they haven't simply read online like the rest of us anyway?
I knew from a good manager's perspective that an important piece of software is the product.
What exactly does a UX designer know about the working conditions of an Amazon warehouse that they haven't simply read online like the rest of us anyway?