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

Amazon fined $5.9M for breaking labor law in California

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 253 posts

Re: Amazon fined $5.9M for breaking labor law in California

#31

Post by JumpCrisscross »

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #21
barnabask wrote: post #6

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…

> With ownership, the government also then has the ability to 'peer behind the veil' more easily and make sure management is behaving

You want every politician you don’t like in the country having this power?

> if a company continues to misbehave the government over time takes ownership and can then replace the board

This is expropriation. (It’s also fines with extra steps and ongoing costs.)

> think a corporate equiv to a death penalty

Corporate death penalties are fines with extra steps. They’re a red herring to avoid what companies actually fear, massive fines that force them into liquidation. Anything you want with a corporate death penalty, massive fines achieve more cleanly. The only function bringing the former up has is to distract from the latter.

Re: Amazon fined $5.9M for breaking labor law in California

#33

Post by mananaysiempre »

j-bos wrote: post #29
_DeadFred_ wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Is this a novel concept?

Sounds like expropriation by another name, honestly.

Re: Amazon fined $5.9M for breaking labor law in California

#34

Post by fallingknife »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #25
fallingknife wrote: post #7

The issue here is that Amazon had productivity quotas for its workers that were kept secret from the workers. It's the keeping a secret part that is illegal. On the one hand, this seems reasonable, but the fact that the law only applies to warehouse workers (the "Warehouse Quota Law") and was passed in 2022 makes me suspicious that this isn't a good faith worker protection law but rather specifically targeted at Amaz…

> makes me suspicious that this isn't a good faith worker protection law but rather specifically targeted at Amazon It seems to target Amazon, but for good reasons [1]. The law’s principal mode of enforcement is private [2]. This fine appears to be more the state laying a trail of breadcrumbs for private attorneys to follow than the last word on the matter. > why is it allowed for all other industries? Defining what…

They have a good reason for targeting the practice. They do not have a good reason for targeting Amazon in particular.

And I suspect the good reason you mean is this:

> Quotas must also be limited to not prevent workers from taking rest breaks, meal breaks, bathrooms breaks, or prevent compliance with health and safety standards.

Amazon is not being accused of doing this here. They are being fined for keeping the quota secret, not for the quota itself.

Re: Amazon fined $5.9M for breaking labor law in California

#35

Post by JumpCrisscross »

fallingknife wrote: post #34
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> makes me suspicious that this isn't a good faith worker protection law but rather specifically targeted at Amazon It seems to target Amazon, but for good reasons [1]. The law’s principal mode of enforcement is private [2]. This fine appears to be more the state laying a trail of breadcrumbs for private attorneys to follow than the last word on the matter. > why is it allowed for all other industries? Defining what…

They have a good reason for targeting the practice. They do not have a good reason for targeting Amazon in particular. And I suspect the good reason you mean is this: > Quotas must also be limited to not prevent workers from taking rest breaks, meal breaks, bathrooms breaks, or prevent compliance with health and safety standards. Amazon is not being accused of doing this here. They are being fined for keeping the quo…

> do not have a good reason for targeting Amazon in particular

The law applies to all warehouses.

Re: Amazon fined $5.9M for breaking labor law in California

#36

Post by JumpCrisscross »

numbers wrote: post #32

Amazon made $64,809,782.60 in revenue every hour in Q3 2023. Source: https://www.junglescout.com/blog/how-much-does-amazon-make-i...

How much of that was from Californian warehouses? Because if you don’t do that math, the fine gets overturned by the courts.

That not only reduces the deterrence factor. It delays private enforcement by the harmed employees who would have otherwise relied on the commission’s facts in court without the colour of them being overturned on appeal.

Re: Amazon fined $5.9M for breaking labor law in California

#38

Post by markus_zhang »

barnabask wrote: post #6
StarterPro wrote: post #3

That's, what? Half an hour of operation to them?

In Finland, speeding fines are based on your income. Can we have that, but for corporations?

You can't. In a Capitalistic world, companies, large companies control the world. You are asking for the hand to cut itself. It might work for a few countries but is unthinkable for any medium-large countries when companies are allowed to grow to a certain extent.
Post reply on HN