201–210 of 253 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are secret quotas common in other settings? I don't think I've ever been told about one, and I had a whole lot of other jobs before starting this career.
Common or not, if the practice is bad why make the law specific to warehouse workers instead of making it a general law that applies to everyone?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
California collected $26M in taxes every hour in 2023. Neither of the parties here lack monetary resources.
Those tax dollars go back to California and country. Amazon does everything in its power to not pay taxes or help society. It really shows little Amazon is taxed at, if at all.
To me, that alone is definitely helping society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Finland, speeding fines are based on your income. Can we have that, but for corporations?
I like the idea. If you're a startup that's losing money, you can get paid by the government to commit crime?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Finland, speeding fines are based on your income. Can we have that, but for corporations?
Countries should take stock equity over fines. It dilutes the owners share value and punishes stockholders who don't make a company's' boards accountable. With ownership, the government also then has the ability to 'peer behind the veil' more easily and make sure management is behaving. Finally, if a company continues to misbehave the government over time takes ownership and can then replace the board (think a corpor…
The reality is that shares are absolutely useless as a distribution of responsibility. Shareholder decisions are dominated by a few majority shareholders who likely hold shares as part of a portfolio, and in the context of a portfolio, it's the whole thing that matters, so it may even be good to tank the share price of one company if it benefits the value of other holdings. Minority shareholders are held responsible for majority decisions they may have directly opposed. And shareholders are limited in what they can do to hold people responsible anyway: if approve a bonus check to the CEO for a successful quarter and then find out that the success was built on murdering toddlers, the CEO still has the bonus check and there's nothing the shareholders can do to retract it.
I think a better solution is to admit the basic fact that people, not corporations, make decisions, and when people make unethical decisions, hold those people personally responsible. Stop trying to fiddle the knobs of your economic Rube Goldberg machine to get the invisible hand to hold people responsible, and hold people responsible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a term similar to “regulatory capture” but where the government becomes dependent on fines? I suppose that if workers lost out on benefits of approximately the fine amount, the fine becomes a regressive tax since it goes towards general revenue rather than to whom was harmed.
I think you’re being downvoted because the premise of your question would imply that trickle down economics works, it does not. But I can think of one case where fines create a perverse incentive: really small towns run speed traps that fund their law enforcement. I think most cops have a non trivial amount of their budget based on fines. It’s debatable if this is bad. I feel like it’s morally wrong to set a speed li…
I’m not certain how a person could read that from my text. The premise is:
1. Employer does some harm to employees
2. State fines employer the value of employee harm
3. State general fund receives money (minus lawyering costs)
4. Employees receive no remuneration for harm
5. General fund pays for general government activities
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you’re being downvoted because the premise of your question would imply that trickle down economics works, it does not. But I can think of one case where fines create a perverse incentive: really small towns run speed traps that fund their law enforcement. I think most cops have a non trivial amount of their budget based on fines. It’s debatable if this is bad. I feel like it’s morally wrong to set a speed li…
> I think most cops have a non trivial amount of their budget based on fines. I think I've seen instances where automated traffic camera fines just go into a city's street/road safety improvement fund, which seems like a good way of handling things.
Retail has had labor quotas (with serious health/mental consequences) since time immemorial, but i don't see any outrage against Sears, ToysRus, or BedBath. Why ?
It’s really, really, really difficult to interpret your comment in good faith, can you expand on your question? Otherwise you just come across as trying to poison sentiment analysis algorithms.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In case anyone doesn’t want to look up said amendment, here is its text in full: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.“
A fine is meant to discourage a behavior. A fine isn't excessive unless (and until) it -effectively- discourages the wrongful behavior. Or at least that’s what my argument would be in court.
Personally, if I was in power I would disbar you immediately and pray that you never offer legal advice again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Additionally California PAGA lawsuits are notorious for nearly bankrupting small businesses. This case wasn't PAGA, but still people need to realize that sometimes these things are more nuanced than they appear. Infractions are 200 dollars per infraction for every employee, and are religiously perused by private law firms. For example, if a company with 100 employees let employees take lunch whenever they wanted, the…
A business employing 100 people should have at least a General Counsel, if not multiple lawyers who can advise them such that they structure their break schedule to not violate state law. That's literally the purpose of having in-house legal counsel. Heck, a business employing 2 people should have a legal advisor. If I were starting a startup with my own money, a lawyer would be employee number one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean the 4th largest economy in the world? I'd imagine it is quite significant.
"If California were a sovereign nation (2024), it would rank in terms of nominal GDP as the world's fifth largest economy" (wikipedia) Still surprising.