Bye, Amazon • Hacker News Board

Re: Bye, Amazon

#821

Post by ngngngng » Mon, May 04, 2020, 8:40 PM UTC

sadturnip wrote: post #413

AlexandrB wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Which is the mythical company treating their low-skill workers far better than Amazon? That's an easy one: Costco. Do a cursory Google search and you'll generally find positive stories going back years. There's nothing "mythical" here, it's a matter of explicit policy difference between the two retailers.

Costco is an okay place to work however, As someone who worked for Costco in the past, i think i was getting barely $1.50 more than minimum wage (this was 2015). Furthermore you have a ton of full time employees who will sing praises about the company. However part timers get shafted hard. Oh you can't work 3 days a week due to school, okay enjoy barely 8 hours a week. There were a lot of people there who had to work…

Where was this? Sounds like the kind of things that are extremely variable depending on where you live. When I was working near minimum wage in California, companies would screw me like this. But when I moved to Utah, companies would give me nearly any hours I asked for since they really needed the work done.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#822

Post by mmaunder » Mon, May 04, 2020, 8:41 PM UTC

Very difficult to put emotion aside when thinking about these things. I expect to be crucified for even asking this question because the audience here has a bias towards supporting activism. But oh well here goes:

If Amazon condone and even enable employee activism, what bad things could that enable? I don’t mean unions. I mean a group of say 20 employees trying to bring about a change they truly believe in.

Amazon has over 500,000 employees. Think of the number of edge cases. You agree with these good folks that were fired. But what about carrying guns to work? Conservative or liberal issues if you’re the other side of the table?

That employee base is a small city. Is every warehouse a town square with freedom to assemble? Every office?

Fighting the good fight is often necessary. But it’s also a seductive idea until it’s not your fight and disrupting your day - or worse, something you vehemently disagree with and is causing you distress.

Is there another side to this argument?

(Edit for spelling)

Re: Bye, Amazon

#823

Post by pathseeker » Mon, May 04, 2020, 8:42 PM UTC

pm90 wrote: post #584

joeys7 wrote: post #572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back when I was in university, I feel like they really brainwashed me to think these tech companies were making the world a better place. I was too naive. I think a lot of young software engineers started out like me. There’s also the fact that these companies are so big, they have a lot of variation inside them. For example at Amazon Music, there really isn’t a lot of evilness there, it’s just getting people to pay…

Same. When I was in college, all my peers talked about FAANG's in glowing terms. Doesn't help that these companies often recruit heavily from Universities, so you have alum networks that talk about how great the companies are etc. Its quite an evil genius. When people finally do get a job, they often realize its not always the cool shit that they heard about; most often than not its some uncool shit that brings in a…

That's just because 5+ years ago Amazon/Facebook/Google weren't "giant evil shit-lords" so-to-speak. They were cool even among industry folks. It wasn't long ago that having Google on your resume meant something was special about you.

Facebook/Google/Amazon aren't really cool in colleges anymore either.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#824

Post by arez » Mon, May 04, 2020, 8:43 PM UTC

eanzenberg wrote: post #812

60secz wrote: post #659

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* cough * It goes on to give tips to managers for spotting union activity. “Make it a point to regularly talk to associates in the break room. This will help protect you from accusations that you were only in the break room to spy on pro union associates,” the video says. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/22/how-amazon-is-fighting-back-... On internal company email lists and chat groups on Thursday and Friday that Recode…

There is no faster way to stagnate an industry and destroy innovation than by workers unionizing. Enjoy more outsourcing of jobs than before.

the entire german country would like to have a word with you

Re: Bye, Amazon

#825

Post by taurath » Mon, May 04, 2020, 8:44 PM UTC

syshum wrote: post #805

taurath wrote: post #728

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The workers in response didn’t cheat hours, they were flexible when the times got really tough, and in the end, they greatly respected my parents for running business the “right way”. The best way to get people who show up for work on time, don't steal from the register and don't call out sick is to pay them enough to have a life that isn't sent into a stress spiral by an electricity bill thats 10% higher. Corporat…

>>there's enough desperate people EVEN WITH FULL EMPLOYMENT to not raise wages as long as none of the other corporations do. There is evidence to the contrary, as these companies have infact (or did pre COVID) raise their wages beyond the minimum wage they were doing. Some of it is in response to Retail raise wages (i.e Walmart when to a $11/12 nation wide min wage) in response most fast food also had to raise their…

I don't disagree that there is some wage pressure - its the fact that wage increases only started to outdistance inflation only have 3 sustained years of basically no unemployment, which is likely a once in a century event, that there are more factors at play holding wages down.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#826

Post by DriveReduction » Mon, May 04, 2020, 8:44 PM UTC

toasterlovin wrote: post #653

pwinnski wrote: post #647

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bray didn't quit over the conditions in the warehouses, he quit over Amazon's brazen and dishonest firings of organizers. It's possible that if every Amazon warehouse were run as well, those organizers would not have arisen, but it's Amazon nastiness toward them that's most alarming.

Have you considered the possibility that Amazon actually treats their workers okay and that it's the organizers are dishonest? Why does the presumption of evil only go in one direction?

> Have you considered the possibility that Amazon actually treats their workers okay and that it's the organizers are dishonest? Why does the presumption of evil only go in one direction?

Yes.

As an example:

> We’re already seeing devastating climate impacts: unprecedented flooding in India and Mozambique, dry water wells in Africa, coastal displacement in Asia, wildfires and floods in North America, and crop failure in Latin America

That is so far removed from a company that provides web hosting and handles shipping logistics.

What does transporting a cardboard box have anything to do with flooding in Mozambique?

While it's unfortunate catastrophes happen. Let's be generous and assume those events are due to lax environmental regulations (0.001% to 90%).

Amazon is just 1% of whatever that is. So, if these activists wish came true - and ultimately a drop in the bucket.

A competitor without the hindrance could likely make up for any pollution they don't create.

If you want to shape ecology, you do it through regulations (statutes). And all countries need to be on board with it.

I'm going to have to go with management on this one - the exaggeration of Amazon's impact on the issue really hurts their credibility. Nothing wrong with climate change - but really against disrupting organizations needlessly.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#827

Post by wpietri » Mon, May 04, 2020, 8:44 PM UTC

pathseeker wrote: post #816

wpietri wrote: post #689

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A new venture that rehired a lot of the same workers. If you listen to the TAL piece, you'll hear how they changed. It wasn't an overnight transformation, but ultimately the workers changed where GM managers couldn't.

The plant was open until GM went bankrupt. What do you mean the managers couldn't change?

I mean that the purpose of the joint venture was for GM to learn Toyota's methods. That one plant was fine, but the broader purpose was for GM to learn how to do it everywhere. They never did. If you'd like to know more, I suggest you listen to the story linked above, or read the transcript which is linked from that.

Re: Bye, Amazon

#828

Post by cbsmith » Mon, May 04, 2020, 8:47 PM UTC

natosaichek wrote: post #733

cbsmith wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those stories sound nothing like the stories you hear about highly compensated employees at tech companies. You never hear stories of them ignoring strict company policies, engaging in drug abuse on the job, or displaying behaviour that makes other employees fear for their own safety.

No you don't understand. Cocaine is totally different from crack. But I couldn't think of a 'danger' equivalent off the top of my head. What are some examples?

Well, for starters, you hear from a lot of women who feel like their safety may be at risk because of behaviour of certain individuals they work with...

Re: Bye, Amazon

#829

Post by cbsmith » Mon, May 04, 2020, 8:48 PM UTC

AdrianB1 wrote: post #790

cbsmith wrote: post #508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also the reality that "low-skilled" really means "there's more supply of the skill than there is demand", or "depends purely on a skill that can be developed, as opposed to natural talent/advantage that few people have".

There is the reality that ~ 10% of the population has an IQ so low, US army cannot recruit them by law. 10% is a lot of people, a few tens of millions in US. I have someone in the family that has the mind of a children of 8-10 years old, for that person a "low skilled" job in an Amazon warehouse would be excellent; the alternative is zero income.

There's also a IQ != skill.

But I believe your specific example here fits the "depends purely on a skill that can be developed, as opposed to natural talent/advantage that few people have".

Re: Bye, Amazon

#830

Post by jzoch » Mon, May 04, 2020, 8:51 PM UTC

mmaunder wrote: post #822

Very difficult to put emotion aside when thinking about these things. I expect to be crucified for even asking this question because the audience here has a bias towards supporting activism. But oh well here goes: If Amazon condone and even enable employee activism, what bad things could that enable? I don’t mean unions. I mean a group of say 20 employees trying to bring about a change they truly believe in. Amazon h…

There is nothing wrong with allowing employees to protest (voice their opinions). This would be like protesting that you want to bring a gun to work - not bringing your gun to work. Amazon is not allowing the conversation to even happen - and even then, there is no collective bargaining power given to these employees. They have no way to ensure that their voices are heard.

The only downside to this approach can be that democracy has its faults and a simple majority-rules approach can prove problematic (see elections going wonky these past few years while ignoring all the shady stuff going on). Its worth it.