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

Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 399 posts

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#51

Post by kube-system »

tyingq wrote: post #18
alehul wrote: post #12

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?

I agree with you. Amazon, should though, be aware of the Streisand effect. They are amplifying their problem by firing people instead of, say...reprimanding them.

> Amazon.com Inc (AMZN.O) said on Tuesday it terminated two employees, who criticized the working conditions

It doesn't sound like Amazon is attempting to hide anything here.

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#52

Post by sudosysgen »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #13
advisedwang wrote: post #7

> “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…

Uhh, I don't want to be Amazon defender, but in US most of the employment is at will. In practical terms, they can fire you for any or no reason at all. There are practicalities that come into play that have to do with unemployment insurance and whatnot, but company policy violation is a defensible 'cause' for firing. I am not a lawyer nor am I condoning this, but them is the facts. edit: added play

It is fallacious to think that because something is legal, it is OK.

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#53

Post by ignoramous »

advisedwang wrote: post #7

> “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…

WaPo has an in-depth article with interviews from fired employees, @marencost and @emahlee [0].

These tweets, made on 27 March, allegedly broke the camel's back:

@marencosta I am matching donations to $500 to support my Amazon warehouse colleagues and their communities, while they struggle to get consistent, sufficient protections and procedures from our employer. DM or comment for match. [1]

@emahlee I'm matching donations up to $500 to support my Amazon warehouse worker colleagues. "The lack of safe and sanitary working conditions" puts them and the public at risk.

It's bad ya'll... [2] and @marencosta re-tweeted it.

@marencosta had been warned by Amazon, in late 2019, to not publicly disparage them.

---

[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/04/13/amazon-...

[1] https://twitter.com/marencosta/status/1243585580736237568

[2] https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1243441985173651456.html

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#54

Post by burrows »

alexandercrohde wrote: post #41
A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhh, I don't want to be Amazon defender, but in US most of the employment is at will. In practical terms, they can fire you for any or no reason at all. There are practicalities that come into play that have to do with unemployment insurance and whatnot, but company policy violation is a defensible 'cause' for firing. I am not a lawyer nor am I condoning this, but them is the facts. edit: added play

I think people are outraged not because it's illegal, but because it's unconscionable. I think the general understanding is people shouldn't have outside-work activities be held against them, maybe it's time for the law to catch up. It's pretty easy to come up with a lot of absurd and "legal" at-will policies (e.g. we'll fire anybody who watches porn)

The employee should negotiate “fireable offenses” into his contract. There’s no reason to increase state involvement with new laws.

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#55

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0 »

atomi wrote: post #49
alexandercrohde wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people are outraged not because it's illegal, but because it's unconscionable. I think the general understanding is people shouldn't have outside-work activities be held against them, maybe it's time for the law to catch up. It's pretty easy to come up with a lot of absurd and "legal" at-will policies (e.g. we'll fire anybody who watches porn)

> Uhh, I don't want to be Amazon defender, This should give you a hint about this person's intention. Their argument is a classic appeal to authority. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

Could you elaborate?

I think I either misunderstand this type of argument or you meant to use a different link. If you look at my history, I am hardly a proponent of all things Amazon. I recognize their strengths and their weaknesses. It is important to clear eyes about all this.

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#56

Post by Retric »

stronglikedan wrote: post #31
gryzzly wrote: post #23

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.

The cynic in me thinks that for any number of potential candidates who feel the same, there are exponentially more candidates that just want to work there regardless, and the recruiting team knows this.

They could be alienating vastly more people than that. However, they only need to higher a tiny fraction of the US workforce each year. So, it’s still not a significant issue.

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#57

Post by katmannthree »

burrows wrote: post #54
alexandercrohde wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people are outraged not because it's illegal, but because it's unconscionable. I think the general understanding is people shouldn't have outside-work activities be held against them, maybe it's time for the law to catch up. It's pretty easy to come up with a lot of absurd and "legal" at-will policies (e.g. we'll fire anybody who watches porn)

The employee should negotiate “fireable offenses” into his contract. There’s no reason to increase state involvement with new laws.

>There’s no reason to increase state involvement with new laws.

Well, not unless you consider the significant disparity in negotiating power between the employer and prospective employee when forming that contract. Very few people are in a position to negotiate something like that, and the ones that are aren't likely to be explicitly fired for speaking their mind.

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#58

Post by Tainnor »

atomi wrote: post #49
alexandercrohde wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people are outraged not because it's illegal, but because it's unconscionable. I think the general understanding is people shouldn't have outside-work activities be held against them, maybe it's time for the law to catch up. It's pretty easy to come up with a lot of absurd and "legal" at-will policies (e.g. we'll fire anybody who watches porn)

> Uhh, I don't want to be Amazon defender, This should give you a hint about this person's intention. Their argument is a classic appeal to authority. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

I don't agree with the parent comment at all, but this is not an argument from authority. If anything, it's an instance of the is-ought fallacy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Is%E2%80%93ought_problem

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#59

Post by rochester46 »

ajross wrote: post #46

I think the real story here is not so much whether or not it's OK to fire troublemakers, but how Amazon got itself into an unrecoverably antagonistic relationship with its own workforce. The flip side to being a general union buster and hard-nosed employer advocate during "peacetime" is that you lose the moral high ground in crisis and have no where to turn to but more employee-alienating policies. I mean, let's be h…

Amazon has nearly a million employees. The gist of your comment is valid, but firing two people (or even two hundred people) out of a million doesn't even come close to meaning that they have an antagonistic relationship with its workforce in general.

Re: Amazon fires two UX designers critical of warehouse working conditions

#60

Post by sfkdjf9j3j »

PopeDotNinja wrote: post #26

In general, trash talking one's employer in public is usually inversely proportional to the longevity of one's employment with said employer.

I've reread this comment a few times and I'm still not sure what to make of it. It's obviously true, but why post something with such a smug and gloating tone? Are you happy about how Amazon warehouse workers are treated and pleased to see people speaking out being fired in the midst of a pandemic?
Post reply on HN