3 ms·

Amazon realized that they kept getting a black eye because of their wages so of course they pivoted. Now some workers are probably worse off. I blame the media

Amazon realized that they kept getting a black eye because of their wages so of course they pivoted. Now some workers are probably worse off. I blame the media for only caring about sensationalist headlines.

skookumchuck 8y ago
Our local communist Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant loves to excoriate Amazon with her bullhorn. She gets a lot of press for it.
pm90 8y ago
What nonsense. Many thousands of workers will be compensated much better. Other retailers will have to increase their wages. This is a good outcome.
- chimpburger 8y ago
  Did you even read the article? Many thousands of workers will be compensated less. The higher wages came at the cost of no more free stocks.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - bryanlarsen 8y ago
    Nobody is going to be compensated less. The "extra" compensation they received before was simply a consequence of the fact that Amazon stock quadrupled in the last three years. So if previously they got $14 + 0.50 in shares their total comp ended up being $16. But they still got paid less than somebody who was paid $15 in cash straight up (who could have then purchased AMZN on the market).
  - csharp 8y ago
    I think OP meant that it will hopefully cause other employers to follow lead and raise wages (e.g. fast food, other retailers, etc).
forapurpose 8y ago
> I blame the media Amazon isn't responsible for its own decisions?
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  To some extent, maybe. But then again, if you poke a bear with a stick and it mauls you, nobody will blame the bear. If we expect responsibility for decisions to companies, then it's only fair if media outlets too are held responsible for the consequences of misapplying public pressure.
  - forapurpose 8y ago
    > if you poke a bear with a stick and it mauls you, nobody will blame the bear I think that analogy goes against your argument: The bear is a wild animal unable to make rational decisions. Amazon is an extremely powerful company lead by some of the leading businesspeople in the world. The difference between Amazon and the bear is exactly why Amazon is solely responsible for its decisions. > misapplying That'a s matter of opinion; IMHO, it was and is not at all misapplied.
endorphone 8y ago
I doubt many are worse off, and of the stories about lost fringe benefits there was a telling lack of details. In reality people got a raise and thought "Why not both?" However I think Amazon gave raises simply because they needed to recruit and retain. In my area Amazon runs "we're hiring...if you're alive you get a job, no resume no interview" constantly year round, so they clearly have a pressing need. At some point running the ads and constantly hiring is more expensive than just paying a more competitive rate.

skookumchuck 8y ago

Our local communist Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant loves to excoriate Amazon with her bullhorn. She gets a lot of press for it.

pm90 8y ago

What nonsense. Many thousands of workers will be compensated much better. Other retailers will have to increase their wages. This is a good outcome.

chimpburger 8y ago
Did you even read the article? Many thousands of workers will be compensated less. The higher wages came at the cost of no more free stocks.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- bryanlarsen 8y ago
  Nobody is going to be compensated less. The "extra" compensation they received before was simply a consequence of the fact that Amazon stock quadrupled in the last three years. So if previously they got $14 + 0.50 in shares their total comp ended up being $16. But they still got paid less than somebody who was paid $15 in cash straight up (who could have then purchased AMZN on the market).
- csharp 8y ago
  I think OP meant that it will hopefully cause other employers to follow lead and raise wages (e.g. fast food, other retailers, etc).

forapurpose 8y ago

> I blame the media Amazon isn't responsible for its own decisions?

TeMPOraL 8y ago
To some extent, maybe. But then again, if you poke a bear with a stick and it mauls you, nobody will blame the bear. If we expect responsibility for decisions to companies, then it's only fair if media outlets too are held responsible for the consequences of misapplying public pressure.
- forapurpose 8y ago
  > if you poke a bear with a stick and it mauls you, nobody will blame the bear I think that analogy goes against your argument: The bear is a wild animal unable to make rational decisions. Amazon is an extremely powerful company lead by some of the leading businesspeople in the world. The difference between Amazon and the bear is exactly why Amazon is solely responsible for its decisions. > misapplying That'a s matter of opinion; IMHO, it was and is not at all misapplied.

endorphone 8y ago

I doubt many are worse off, and of the stories about lost fringe benefits there was a telling lack of details. In reality people got a raise and thought "Why not both?" However I think Amazon gave raises simply because they needed to recruit and retain. In my area Amazon runs "we're hiring...if you're alive you get a job, no resume no interview" constantly year round, so they clearly have a pressing need. At some point running the ads and constantly hiring is more expensive than just paying a more competitive rate.