221–230 of 387 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I imagine that this may be true, but only if there's a single union in the industry. Why on Earth would that be the case?
They are assuming the German sector based model here.
my favourite FC ambassador for sure https://twitter.com/SvetaPinto
I'm pretty sure that's one of the meme accounts that popped up/changed their name after this thread happened and not an actual FC ambassador.
Their twitter bio makes it pretty clear they're not a real... propaganda account? I'm not even sure what to call the other ones in the thread.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
of course a single young person can't do much other than speak (which is after all supposed to be the point of twitter), but on the aggregate it does shift the conservation. Over the last few years people have become more aware of amazon's business practises and it is starting to be reflected in politics, on both sides of the isle. Sure, a tweet chain like this isn't going to change the world, but it's better than no…
I get how how an individual might feel they can't do much more or better than nothing. I would argue though that if they choose just to tweet and so forth, they're not doing much at all. I'm still not sure that there really is much of a change with twitter style activism. I suspect everyone who is inclined to belive a thing already are in their own protected circles (to use a google+ term ) and they're not changing m…
I had a sneaking suspicion that Amazon's product quality overall was in the toilet due to low qualify manufacturing and co-mingling genuine products with knockoffs in the warehouses, but I didn't really have anything to back me up other than products that I was unsatisfied with. Then HN threads and comments started mentioning the same thing. That stuff has been spreading like wildfire.
I'd argue that voices in unison on Twitter would have a farther reach that a niche community like HN. I know people in my circles have been even more skeptical of products sold on Amazon for these very reasons.
For those who aren't familiar with 'chum ads', they simply optimize for what gets the most clicks and longest views. Of course, the thing with the highest click through rate would be pornography, but since pornography is banned, it selects the closest thing to that. As well as things that trigger raw emotion like miracle cures and lots of weird holes.
This kind of Borg service also sounds like an abuse of data analytics.
They have a system that identifies angry people. They find an optimum thing to say in response to a certain kind of reaction (say, Amazon worker treatment). They assign $15/hour workers to respond to this tweet and give an optimum response. The service person then sits around responding to thousands of tweets per day, forgetting what conversations they've had, and it results in this experience.
The “ambassadors” are so bad it’s embarrassing. Which leads me to think they are not actually PR professionals (they would actually not talk in such a robotic way), but really low level employees that are paid extra to talk good on social media, and are repeating from some officially sanctioned book of “what you should and shouldn’t say” they don’t sound like Borg, they sound like McDonald’s cashiers, just doing thei…
Oh, wow, "FC" means "fulfillment centre". Doesn't that sound a lot like... an enrichment centre? Certainly sounds nicer than "warehouse".
A real gem in there was the comment of "there is actually an open door policy at the FCs, which allows us to directly communicate with our managers if we have concerns or issues." Think about that for a second. The fact that they feel that is notable to call out, saying they "actually" have that... implies that they believe it is normal to not have an open door policy, and not be allowed to talk to their managers abo…
I work in a large and friendly company, in which there seems to be a general fear of speaking up. if a company as employee-friendly as mine has difficulty in moving people towards an open speak-up culture, I think it’s totally reasonable to assume that many companies aren't successful at this, either. It should therefore be reasonable for an Amazon warehouse employee to point out the counter-case for their experience…
The majority of the team answers the survey questions dishonestly, so as to avoid rolling shit. The others feel it's their only way of expressing discontent short of leaving.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anyone who owns the means but does not actually do the work of production. This is in contrast to a worker-owned structure. It leads to concentration of power, since the profit from many workers goes to one or a few owners. Each owner is more powerful than any one worker, so workers have to act collectively to have leverage.
This is a fallacy. If you're going to talk about profit then you must also consider that the risk and loss also goes to owners while workers get paid either way. This is something that should be rather simple to understand in the HN/Startup crowd. Considering that anyone can buy shares or start their own business, my point stands that this is the most non-exclusive club possible.
Ability to buy large quantities of shares is not "non-exclusive." Not everyone has money.
I feel like this is twitter in a nutshell, and that goes for everyone involved. The very first response is "eally like? cause your workers are liars?" There we go, now the entire conversation is everything or nothing, you're either with them or against them. Then it's off into personal attacks and arguments about followers and etc. Nobody is talking to each other in any of that. They're just posting for everyone else…