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

Bye, Amazon

tbray.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 1001 posts

Re: Bye, Amazon

#791

Post by mkolodny »

o10449366 wrote: post #721
three_seagrass wrote: post #676

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://nypost.com/2019/11/30/amazon-warehouses-are-cult-lik... >I soon learned that only difference between an Amazon warehouse and a third-world sweatshop were the robots. At Amazon, you were surrounded by bots, and they were treated better than the humans.

Are there 3rd world sweatshops that pay $16 USD/hour and provide benefits? I'd wager there are a few more differences than just the robots.

Here are a few examples of "sweatshop" conditions in the Amazon factory from the article:

- No chairs for a 12-hour shift

- Time spent going to the bathroom gets removed from your break time

- 30-minute lunch includes a 30-minute round trip to get to the lunch room

Re: Bye, Amazon

#792

Post by cmckn »

taurath wrote: post #743
jjeaff wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that they "shouldn't exist" doesn't make much sense to me. As long as you treat your employees with respect and pay legal wages, who are we to say that the wages are "poverty wages". Many of these low wage, entry level positions are/were meant to be filled by young people, still living with parents, or part time workers who may have a spouse that is the primary earner. The problem is that due to lack of othe…

> As long as you treat your employees with respect and pay legal wages, who are we to say that the wages are "poverty wages". When working those wages leave you in poverty its poverty wages. > Many of these low wage, entry level positions are/were meant to be filled by young people, still living with parents, or part time workers who may have a spouse that is the primary earner. This is not the case, and has never be…

> the "young people" theory to me frequently only comes about from people who've grown up in affluent areas and had evening jobs at grocery stores.

You've hit the nail on the head. This position is privilege exemplified, and indicates a lack of empathy for people who do not have the skills, opportunity, or desire to obtain higher-paying positions. Everyone in our society should be able to live with dignity, regardless of their vocation. No one needs to scrape by in the wealthiest country on earth, especially when minimum-wage jobs make so much of our society possible.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#793

Post by Havoc »

fastball wrote: post #155
Havoc wrote: post #71

>humans in the warehouses as fungible units of pick-and-pack potential. Only that’s not just Amazon, it’s how 21st-century capitalism is done. That's the part that scares me - it's not just Amazon. Automation hasn't even kicked off properly and we've already got humans being replaceable at best

I'm not sure what else you can expect in a world where jobs that require effectively 0 skill exist. I'd prefer the "full automation" route, as I think it would be better for humans to not need to perform these jobs. But until then, isn't it a good thing that jobs which require no skills exist? Since there seem to be many people with little-to-no skills?

>I think it would be better for humans to not need to perform these jobs.

Depends on how this plays out. Either some sort of UBI future...or potentially dramatically increased inequality and much suffering by a big chunk of humanity that can no longer economically compete at all. Could go either way I think.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#794

Post by AlexCoventry »

xenocyon wrote: post #688

My personal snapping point as a consumer occurred several years ago, over something that's definitely not anecdotal: When Amazon employees are frisked at the end of their shift (which is a practice that applies to at least some warehouses), they are not paid for the time they spend waiting in line to be frisked. This is not an anecdote; indeed Amazon fought and won a court case insisting that it has the right to not…

> See https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-amazon-com/u-s-....

Where is the 2014 Supreme Court ruling mentioned by this article?

Re: Bye, Amazon

#795

Post by klyrs »

shadowgovt wrote: post #682
pietrovismara wrote: post #668

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just compare the incentives for both parts to be dishonest and you have your answer. What would workers gain from being dishonest except the risk of being fired or retaliated upon? And why, if organizers are lying, can't Amazon just disprove them by showing to the public their perfect working conditions? Finally, isn't it a natural instinct to side with the weaker element in a fight? Does Amazon really need your supp…

> What would workers gain from being dishonest Union representation and improved compensation and employment benefits. Not to say either party is being honest or being dishonest. But it's clear there's plenty to gain on both sides by, on the one hand, painting organizers ad bad employees, and on the other hand, painting working conditions as worse than they are.

> > What would workers gain from being dishonest

> Union representation and improved compensation and employment benefits.

Getting union representation requires, in jurisdictions I'm familiar with, at least a 50% buy-in from other employees. You're not going to get that by lying to them about their own working conditions. This kind of dishonesty can attract some fist-shakers on the internet, but they don't get a vote.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#796

Post by specialp »

pathseeker wrote: post #735
specialp wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes for me too. The fact that Amazon is so cheap that they want employees to sit around for 20-30 minutes after their shift unpaid to get searched to make sure they aren't stealing blew me away. It is one thing if Amazon wants to do this and pay their employees, but to not pay is wrong. And they felt so strongly about this they appealed a case all the way to the Supreme Court... That was the snapping point for me too…

Where do you draw the line? Should people be compensated for their commute? It's an interesting debate that has emerged in airports as well: https://www.talbottlawfirm.com/does-an-employer-have-to-pay-...

To me, if you are not free to walk out the door and do whatever you please, you have an obligation to an employer, and are therefore working. I worked a college job fixing bowling equipment and they tried to make me clock out for my meals. I refused unless I was then free to leave the building. As if I have to be there on call then I am still working.

Amazon is not allowing these people to walk out the door and go home. That is taking their time for company policies. So that is working.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#797

Post by everybodyknows »

oppositelock wrote: post #485
supergeek133 wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is a two way street. If you've never been involved at a management or ownership level of a business that has "low pay" labor (e.g., food service, warehouse, retail sales). For every 2-3 decent workers there is one that just takes pure advantage of the environment (e.g., stealing product, stealing time, etc). Sometimes this occurs at great cost for a period of time before it is discovered. EDIT: This was…

I can confirm this, having first hand experience with it. We hired many low-skill workers at a big tech company that you've heard of about ten years ago. These workers received a couple of weeks of training, and then were set to do a rather simple, menial, repetitive job. These workers didn't sell products, but did very low level tech work, but the entire operation was mired in drama. For example, we had a strict no…

Being compelled by poverty to continue working elbow to elbow with a peer who flashes deadly weapons strikes me as fairly dehumanizing.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#798

Post by telaelit »

hourislate wrote: post #615

Completely anecdotal. It's possible some Amazon Warehouses are run better than others. A friend who recently got a job (5 weeks ago) at one of Amazons warehouses (NJ/NYC area) has only praise for the way things are run. They take his temperature 3 times a day, provide a mask, constantly monitor social distancing, clean washrooms every hour, enforce social distancing in any break rooms, work areas, etc. He says it's n…

This seems like a pretty obviously planted pro-Amazon, anti-worker, propaganda

Re: Bye, Amazon

#800

Post by joshl325 »

pathseeker wrote: post #735
specialp wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes for me too. The fact that Amazon is so cheap that they want employees to sit around for 20-30 minutes after their shift unpaid to get searched to make sure they aren't stealing blew me away. It is one thing if Amazon wants to do this and pay their employees, but to not pay is wrong. And they felt so strongly about this they appealed a case all the way to the Supreme Court... That was the snapping point for me too…

Where do you draw the line? Should people be compensated for their commute? It's an interesting debate that has emerged in airports as well: https://www.talbottlawfirm.com/does-an-employer-have-to-pay-...

Should people be compensated for the time they brush their teeth or have breakfast?

Of course not.

Once you step into your work, you should be paid for your time. Especially when you have no control over that.

Post reply on HN