> On-call in general (24/7 availability for some period of time), is not exclusively an Amazon thing. I'm surprised the writer tried to portray it so. I don't

> On-call in general (24/7 availability for some period of time), is not exclusively an Amazon thing. I'm surprised the writer tried to portray it so. I don't think the writer did. The problem I see being described is not so much being on call, as instead being called. Lots. Because there seems to be no on-duty staff who are capable of doing the work. In this article, "on call" really means "on duty during non-work hours... a lot". It's a tactic to avoid paying on-duty people. Just make all employees work 24/7! Why didn't I think of that. That's a great business model.