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

21–30 of 399 posts

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

#21

Post by kenforthewin »

tptacek wrote: post #9
kenforthewin wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The WaPo article is unfavorable to Amazon, puts "violated company policies" in quotes, buries the detail in the end of the article, and gives the employees quotes to rebut Amazon's policies. These kinds of superficial dismissive comments crud up the threads. You should at least read the article --- you say you didn't, due to the paywall --- before writing like this.

My comment was a bit on the nose but the point is valid, there's no good reason to trust an article that's critical of Amazon when the paper is owned by Bezos.

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

#24

Post by elicash »

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

For folks looking for extra protections, you should include a call for protected concerted activity when voicing your opinions and directing them towards fellow employees:

https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/the-law/em...

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

#25

Post by Angostura »

influx wrote: post #10
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…

Amazon is very clear when you're hired that you're not allowed to represent the company or it's positions on social media or anywhere publicly without getting permission. You can agree or disagree with that policy, but it's not new. Source: first heard of this policy when I was hired at Amazon in 2007.

They weren't "representing the company" which means speaking its behalf. They were criticising some of it's policies.

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

#27

Post by elicash »

influx wrote: post #10
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…

Amazon is very clear when you're hired that you're not allowed to represent the company or it's positions on social media or anywhere publicly without getting permission. You can agree or disagree with that policy, but it's not new. Source: first heard of this policy when I was hired at Amazon in 2007.

The policy could also be in violation of law. Hard to see without looking at the policy and also without looking at the substance of the comments. But there are federal laws protecting certain worker activity and a policy doesn't overrule that.

It depends on the specifics of this case.

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

#28

Post by [deleted] »

kenforthewin wrote: post #21
tptacek wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The WaPo article is unfavorable to Amazon, puts "violated company policies" in quotes, buries the detail in the end of the article, and gives the employees quotes to rebut Amazon's policies. These kinds of superficial dismissive comments crud up the threads. You should at least read the article --- you say you didn't, due to the paywall --- before writing like this.

My comment was a bit on the nose but the point is valid, there's no good reason to trust an article that's critical of Amazon when the paper is owned by Bezos.

[deleted]

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

#29

Post by jeswin »

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 between these two types of actions. When we don't do that, we weaken legitimate free speech.

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

#30

Post by epicureanideal »

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.

Not to worry, they'll simply say they have a "talent shortage" and ask the government to help supply them with workers whose situations are so desperate they won't think about the company's business practices.

(Note, this is not actually a jab at Amazon in particular.)

Post reply on HN