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

Amazon doesn't 'employ' drivers, but hired firms to prevent them from unionizing

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 431 posts

Re: Amazon doesn't 'employ' drivers, but hired firms to prevent them from unionizing

#41

Post by tekla »

jxf wrote: post #15
bluedino wrote: post #12

I'm always amazed at the stark differences between UPS drivers, and Amazon drivers. UPS trucks are always clean. They follow the rules of the road. The drivers wear neat uniforms, they walk on the sidewalks, they're polite, they're just professionals held to a higher standard. Then there are Amazon drivers. They park blocking half the road, music blasting, the vans usually look like they haven't been washed in a mont…

You get what you pay for. UPS drivers are unionized, and Amazon's aren't.

Wait, UPS fucking sucks though. Amazon drivers make a attempt to hide packages, UPS tosses it 10 feet over the gate and mark it delivered in person.

Re: Amazon doesn't 'employ' drivers, but hired firms to prevent them from unionizing

#42

Post by Aunche »

NikolaNovak wrote: post #25
bluedino wrote: post #12

I'm always amazed at the stark differences between UPS drivers, and Amazon drivers. UPS trucks are always clean. They follow the rules of the road. The drivers wear neat uniforms, they walk on the sidewalks, they're polite, they're just professionals held to a higher standard. Then there are Amazon drivers. They park blocking half the road, music blasting, the vans usually look like they haven't been washed in a mont…

Fair enough, but I wonder how much areas and personal experiences matter. My experience with UPS over last 2 decades, as a receiving individual , has been dismal (condos in Toronto and now house in satellite residential community). I understand they optimize toward businesses, and I'm sure as a business their procedures are streamlined and efficient, but as a resident receiving package, it's awful. Majority of packag…

My experience with UPS has been similarly poor. For two addresses in different states, whenever UPS sent me a package that required my signature, they simply forge it and mark it as delivered. They don't even bother to ring the doorbell.

Re: Amazon doesn't 'employ' drivers, but hired firms to prevent them from unionizing

#43

Post by Zigurd »

bluedino wrote: post #12

I'm always amazed at the stark differences between UPS drivers, and Amazon drivers. UPS trucks are always clean. They follow the rules of the road. The drivers wear neat uniforms, they walk on the sidewalks, they're polite, they're just professionals held to a higher standard. Then there are Amazon drivers. They park blocking half the road, music blasting, the vans usually look like they haven't been washed in a mont…

I wish this were not true, but on multiple deliveries I have had UPS falsify a delivery attempt and status. Amazon drivers have never done that.

This has to be a systemic problem with UPS selling service level agreements they can't actually meet. There is no way that UPS's tracking system don't know this is happening.

Re: Amazon doesn't 'employ' drivers, but hired firms to prevent them from unionizing

#44

Post by whalesalad »

bluedino wrote: post #12

I'm always amazed at the stark differences between UPS drivers, and Amazon drivers. UPS trucks are always clean. They follow the rules of the road. The drivers wear neat uniforms, they walk on the sidewalks, they're polite, they're just professionals held to a higher standard. Then there are Amazon drivers. They park blocking half the road, music blasting, the vans usually look like they haven't been washed in a mont…

Here in Detroit the Amazon drivers are pretty great. I would say they are no different than UPS. Always in uniforms. I also see them about 10x as often, so there is a bigger sample size. Once in a while someone will be blasting music, but tbh I would probably be doing the same if I were in their shoes.

FedEx drivers are hands down the worst.

Re: Amazon doesn't 'employ' drivers, but hired firms to prevent them from unionizing

#45

Post by snoman »

taeric wrote: post #31
unyttigfjelltol wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution is to enforce the laws we have, not feign powerlessness every time some crackerjack claims to have identified a profitable loophole.

I'd also be happy with better base level care for everyone. Would start requiring more taxes on corporations, largely because that is where the money is siphoning to. But would be far more efficient than the current efforts we do where every time a new rule is made, bypasses are found.

As long as the bills proposing tax increases also contain where the tax money is going to be allocated, I'd be all for it. America's track record for directing tax money towards the public good, is poor.

Re: Amazon doesn't 'employ' drivers, but hired firms to prevent them from unionizing

#46

Post by croes »

tiahura wrote: post #20
jxf wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You get what you pay for. UPS drivers are unionized, and Amazon's aren't.

Why would I want to pay for somebody else’s clean trucks and neat uniforms? Sounds like a scam to me.

Good service needs good equipment.

Re: Amazon doesn't 'employ' drivers, but hired firms to prevent them from unionizing

#47

Post by linuxftw »

Yes, they don't want to pay actual employees because their costs would be higher. But, they're also likely taking R&D tax credits, and having a 1099 makes the accounting much easier for them.

They make an update to the routing software, or anything, roll it out, 'measure', boom R&D tax credit. This is a boon to their bottom line.

Re: Amazon doesn't 'employ' drivers, but hired firms to prevent them from unionizing

#48

Post by wpietri »

epivosism wrote: post #35
oldjim69 wrote: post #11

Nothing shows the power of unions more than the lengths companies go to fight them. In a Union there is Strength.

This sounds like just the opposite of a capitalist monopoly from the other side. Why would I want any party to control the way a market works? You'll get stagnation both ways. see many historical examples where both monopolies and unions refused change and were overturned, leading to failures. i.e. Detroit I want a functioning competitive market where workers and firms compete and have to adjust and innovate to fit w…

> Nothing shows the power of capitalist monopolies more than the lengths unions go to fight them. Oh wait

You say this as if it's some clever proof, but I'd say it's literally correct. It's why all sorts of people in all sorts of countries fight capitalist monopolies.

And, I should add, for all sorts of reasons. I believe strongly in the power of markets. They're incredible optimization machines. Which is why I'm also for strong markets. Monopolies are just as anti-market as the most ardent communist. People who believe in free enterprise should all fight monopolistic behavior.

Re: Amazon doesn't 'employ' drivers, but hired firms to prevent them from unionizing

#49

Post by whalesalad »

Is this a theory, or proven? It makes a LOT of sense to do what Amazon is doing here. Why would you want to have a ton of depreciating vehicles on your balance sheet? Why would you want the maintenance burden? No need to worry about all the regional differences with vehicle/transport law - you allow people who are based in that region to do it (better).

One could also argue this is good for the economy, in that there are hundreds of small business popping up all over the country to become these service partners.

Unions aside this feels like a smart business move so I don't understand the hate here.

Re: Amazon doesn't 'employ' drivers, but hired firms to prevent them from unionizing

#50

Post by mtmail »

In Germany Amazon uses subcontractors for deliveries. Those are only allowed to have a maximum of 25 (can't remember the exact number) of drivers. That's a strategy to prevent any one subcontractor to become too powerful or merge with others.
Post reply on HN