3 ms·

The astounding thing is that people continue to work here. "It's like modern slavery" was thrown around, but they can quit. They can work somewhere else. Either

The astounding thing is that people continue to work here. "It's like modern slavery" was thrown around, but they can quit. They can work somewhere else. Either conditions are not sufficiently awful or wages are high enough so that they keep getting new employees.

petermcneeley 9y ago
Actually assuming moderate economic rationality (on which free market efficiency is based) we can conclude that each actor is engaged in their most effective means of utility maximization. Basically this is the best job they can get and any variation in employment is likely to be less satisfactory.
- _rpd 9y ago
  That assumption may hold for the average worker, but not necessarily for the group that is complaining.
noir_lord 9y ago
Or the economy is so fucked that they simply can't get another job. Or they need the employer provided healthcare. Or they don't have access to unemployment benefits. Least worst of a bad set is still bad. I worked in warehouses when I was younger and I didn't mind it but they treat you like a human not a cog in a machine.
dv_dt 9y ago
Or all employers in the area are more or the same level of awful. And that says nothing about if they employers can pull off an implicitly coordinated race to the compensation bottom in a given region and section of the workforce.
krapp 9y ago
Plenty of people do quit - Amazon's fulfillment centers have legendarily poor retention. It's one of the reasons Amazon offers stocks to full time employees as compensation for paying below market rates, since they expect almost no one to last the two years it will take to vest. Either they'll quit, or miss quota too often or empty their UPT (or have their UPT retroactively taken, which I've heard happens) and then get fired. But bear in mind that the risk taken by quitting is losing one's livelihood and (in the US) healthcare, and not quickly finding other work in a difficult market. Just because some people find it a rational decision to prefer to put up with Amazon's poor conditions and wages, doesn't mean Amazon is reasonable for treating its employees the way it does.

petermcneeley 9y ago

Actually assuming moderate economic rationality (on which free market efficiency is based) we can conclude that each actor is engaged in their most effective means of utility maximization. Basically this is the best job they can get and any variation in employment is likely to be less satisfactory.

_rpd 9y ago
That assumption may hold for the average worker, but not necessarily for the group that is complaining.

noir_lord 9y ago

Or the economy is so fucked that they simply can't get another job. Or they need the employer provided healthcare. Or they don't have access to unemployment benefits. Least worst of a bad set is still bad. I worked in warehouses when I was younger and I didn't mind it but they treat you like a human not a cog in a machine.

dv_dt 9y ago

Or all employers in the area are more or the same level of awful. And that says nothing about if they employers can pull off an implicitly coordinated race to the compensation bottom in a given region and section of the workforce.

krapp 9y ago

Plenty of people do quit - Amazon's fulfillment centers have legendarily poor retention. It's one of the reasons Amazon offers stocks to full time employees as compensation for paying below market rates, since they expect almost no one to last the two years it will take to vest. Either they'll quit, or miss quota too often or empty their UPT (or have their UPT retroactively taken, which I've heard happens) and then get fired. But bear in mind that the risk taken by quitting is losing one's livelihood and (in the US) healthcare, and not quickly finding other work in a difficult market. Just because some people find it a rational decision to prefer to put up with Amazon's poor conditions and wages, doesn't mean Amazon is reasonable for treating its employees the way it does.