19 ms·
It seems eminently reasonable and obvious that workers should be compensated for performing the Duties of their job while at work or in premises. Clearly submit
by FPGAhacker 7y ago
It seems eminently reasonable and obvious that workers should be compensated for performing the Duties of their job while at work or in premises. Clearly submitting to a security check before being allowed to leave work is an obligation they incur as an employee.
They should not be able to “clock out” until after such security checks.
- jbob2000 7y agoI get what you're saying, but these are the ways that management finds the margins that allow you to receive cheap products on your doorstep in 2 days.
- DangitBobby 7y agoThen the products should cost more or get here in 3 days.
- dev_dull 7y agoKind of like how people say “then unhappy amazon employees should simply find another job”?
- slothtrop 7y agolet's head over to the job tree, what sort of bullshit dropping to the ground today?
- DangitBobby 7y agoDamn, yeah, I guess these guys should really be asking their new employer if they'll be subject to wage theft before they get hired.
- mikelyons 7y agoOr just a̶s̶s̶u̶m̶e̶ be vigilant about it, corporations are amoral profit machines and have no incentive to care about replaceable workers.
- jonfw 7y agoI have no incentive to care about the grocery store I frequent, but it is still illegal for me to steal from them and I can expect to be held accountable by the government in the event that I do steal from them. I'm very libertarian- but at the end of the day I will always support the government authority to punish theft. And a failure to pay employees the agreed upon rate is theft.
- mikelyons 7y agoYou're neglecting to consider that you have to be caught.
- bigj0n 7y agoAmazon was just being tried in court. This isnt about being caught- the evidence is clear as day and was presented in court. This is about a failure of our legal system to protect basic rights of a laborer to be paid the agreed upon rate.
- mikelyons 7y agoHe was talking about their next job ...
- Buge 7y agoI don't see how it's that similar. Employees getting a new job is often very difficult, so would create a lot of difficulty for a lot of people. Whereas Amazon raising their prices by a few cents shouldn't be much work.
- mikelyons 7y agoIt's not about the difficulty of raising prices, it's about the impact to the bottom line profit to shareholders when a few cents is extrapolated over a billion transactions.
- Buge 7y agoThe percent impact would be negligible, I expect lower than daily fluctuation. Anyway, the law isn't just designed to protect shareholders, it's designed to protect everyone. If someone can make money by fraud, that money is not justification to allow fraud. The US economy relies on dependable contacts.
- Supermancho 7y ago> Anyway, the law isn't just designed to protect shareholders, Which law? "The Law" as an ideal, is impartial. That's irrelevant. In practice, applied law (and the cousin enforced law) leads to biased results, favoring the wealthy and the status quo while remaining "impartial".
- Buge 7y agoOk, then "the law shouldn't be just designed". We shouldn't let a defeatist attitude discourage attempts at improvement.
- Supermancho 7y agoNor should we pretend "the law" is perfect in application and outcome...or why would anyone try to improve it?
- gerbilly 7y agoThere's a huge imbalance of power between the company and an individual worker. So it's "kind of" not the same at all. Why are people so quick to defend the powerful?
- kazagistar 7y agoThis is the site of a tech investment company. Its full of the rich and powerful who are protecting themselves.
- eropple 7y agoAspiring rich and powerful. Most people here (myself very much included) remain part of the precariat, and the fangs-out defense of the rich and powerful is most frequently done by those who, in the end, may manage to not lose but likely will not win. John Steinbeck wasn't wrong.
- 4ntonius8lock 7y agoHuman beings are tribal creatures, not individualists. As such, we have leaders and followers. By definition of leaders and followers, most people will be followers, whether for genetic or environmental reasons. Followers will always support those who are leaders. In our current society, that would mean the powerful. If you don't believe me, look at behavioral sciences. Most people will shock someone to death just because an authority said so (yes the Millgram experiments were biased, but the results aren't completely invalidated by that)
- ummonk 7y agoIf Amazon sends you a different product, or charges your credit card more than the claimed price, do you just simply find another retailer, or do you demand a refund?
- goto11 7y agoI don't see how it should affect the speed of delivery that the Amazon employees gets paid for their time? But yeah it might affect the price - or Amazon might be able to optimize the "security check" if they have to compensate workers for the wasted time.
- jbob2000 7y agoMoney saved on labour means you can spend more money on more labour! Or you can buy more machines, or you could invest in a project to reduce packaging times, etc. etc. There's probably not a direct correlation between saving on security checks and reduced shipping time, but it's all connected. Maybe paying these wages means there's no money for more robots, so packaging things will take longer?
- SolaceQuantum 7y ago" Maybe paying these wages means there's no money for more robots, so packaging things will take longer?" It's not like Amazon is running a zero sum balance sheet here. They have profits this could take out of and maintain all their service and speed.
- Dylan16807 7y ago> Maybe paying these wages means there's no money for more robots, so packaging things will take longer? Packing an individual box takes minutes. So it's a question of capacity, and it's pretty binary. If they have enough capacity then a large majority of items can ship within a couple hours. If they don't have enough capacity then the 90th percentile shipping time becomes indefinite/never. A situation where packaging takes an extra day, end of story, is unlikely and unstable. And I'd say that some robots are R&D, so not having money for them has no effect on shipping times, and the rest are a cost-saving measure, so they'll always have the money.
- pnutjam 7y agoNot the workers problem.
- wnevets 7y agothis would cost the customer an extra penny, maybe a nickel?
- jbob2000 7y agoThat wouldn't be the news headline, though. The customer would find out about the cost increase via an article titled something like "Amazon increases prices by up to 20%, are your favourite purchases affected?". I'm with you though, it costs the consumer nothing.
- Frondo 7y agoThis could be addressed by having more labor-conscious journalists and headline writers. Framing it that way, of course people would respond negatively to price increases. "Amazon workers now paid for all the time they're clocked in, prices may be affected" is a lot more sympathetic to workers.
- stallmanite 7y agoI feel like they're labor conscious they just don't give a fuck or are actively opposed.
- blaser-waffle 7y agoLabor conscious writers mean nothing if their editors (and newspaper / website / whatever) owners disagree. Ultimately the wordsmiths need to get paid, too, and they write what gets them money -- which is what their bosses want to print.
- kaikai 7y agoThe Coalition of Immokalee Workers famously used this argument as part of their campaign for farmworkers. The argument was that fast food companies paying 1 cent more per lb. for their tomatoes would have a huge benefit for the workers picking the tomatoes, and they won.
- mnm1 7y agoTwo day shipping of cheap products justify not paying employees for their time? Wtf?
- jbob2000 7y agoI don't agree with it, but two day shipping is the silver bullet that separates Amazon from the competition. I don't hear these stories about Walmart or Costco's warehouses, clearly there's something about the way Amazon does business that causes these problems.
- SolaceQuantum 7y agoI hear a lot of horrific stuff about Walmart working, actually, including their anti-uninionizing efforts. Costco IIRC actually just plain cares for their employees and is doing well in its niche.
- specialist 7y agoSam's Club (Walmart) != Costco Please refer to this documentary about Walmart. They're not just anti-labor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wal-Mart:_The_High_Cost_of_Low_Price https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wal-Mart:_The_High_Cost_of_Low... While Walmart didn't invent bad behavior, they're pretty good at it.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- joejerryronnie 7y agoNot sure why you’re being downvoted here (maybe a misunderstanding of what you’re trying to say?) My takeaway from your comment is that we should first look to our own hypocrisy, i.e. we’re quick to post a comment about Amazon’s unfair labor practices, but we’re just a little quicker to click on that free 2-day prime shipping button.
- goto11 7y agoWhat is hypocritical about that?
- ClumsyPilot 7y agoI thought I was getting my product from a regulated and audited public company. If I wanted to take law into my own hands I might as well go to the local gangsters and smugglers.
- joejerryronnie 7y agoAt least you can purchase from your local gangsters and smugglers with a clear conscience ;-)
- breakerbox 7y agoAmazon gets all the attention because it's Amazon. Work a retail job anywhere and you will discover that MILLIONS of retail workers must do similar checks.
- ceejayoz 7y ago1. They should get paid for that time, too. 2. The article says "the screening takes around 25 minutes to complete", which is not typical in retail.
- ryandrake 7y agoI wonder if there is any limit at all. What if the screenings were 3 hours long before and after each employee’s shift? Would the company still be allowed to not pay them during this time? Seems this is pretty abusable. How long is too long [EDIT: according to the law] to force someone to work without paying?
- entropea 7y ago>How long is too long to force someone to work without paying? 0.00hr. You should always be paid for your time unless that person agrees to volunteer it.
- Dylan16807 7y ago...yes, but there is an implicit "If 25 minutes is okay" before that question. The comment is poking at the current law's logic.
- cwkoss 7y agoEmployees should always be paid for their time, regardless of volunteering, or it allows employers to negatively evaluate and find parallel reasons to fire employees who don't 'choose to volunteer' as a method of institutionalized wage theft
- subsaharancoder 7y ago
- fiter 7y agoThey are also obliged to arrive at the workplace, but their travel time is not necessarily compensated. At least this was put through both a judicial and legal process a long time ago in the ruling before and the Portal-to-Portal Act[0]. I do wonder why this was re-litigated; if this will change it seems like it will have to be through an act of Congress. [0]: https://content.next.westlaw.com/6-508-0673?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true&bhcp=1 https://content.next.westlaw.com/6-508-0673?transitionType=D...
- michaelmrose 7y agoIt is work from which the company derives value in the form of reduced shrink. Furthermore travel to and from work is at the employees discretion and direction they are free to go not only just to and from work but wherever they please and their employer can't be expected to know, care, or pay for it. This is more akin to being locked on the company premises after work has terminated unpaid but unable to leave. If they can't do a bag check in 5 minutes and leave amazon should hire more checkers to do that work or compensate the employees for the time lost. Perhaps the proper thing to assert is imprisonment instead of wage theft.
- fiter 7y agoAs mentioned elsewhere in the comments, the employees should be free to leave but this could result in their firing. Regardless of the philosophy, what do you think of the legal basis?
- simonh 7y agoEmployees generally choose where they live and which jobs they apply for and where, so this is not a reasonable comparison. They have no choice about these checks.
- fiter 7y agoEarly in your reply you say employees have a choice where they apply for jobs, then you say they have no choice on whether to apply for jobs with security measures.
- mfer 7y agoChanging this is up to the legislature rather than the courts. In other news, about 18% of Americans approve of congress job while about 81% disapprove of it [1]. [1] https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional_job_approval-903.html# https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional...!
- paxys 7y agoMost Americans disapprove of Congress but approve of their Congressman/woman. Even at 18% overall approval most of the Senate & House is going to get reelected, which is why nothing changes.
- s1artibartfast 7y agoMost American approve of THEIR congressmen by wide margins (50%+ for, 35% against, 15% no opinion) (Scroll down) https://news.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx
- erikpukinskis 7y agoGerrymandering does lead to wide margins. You pack your opponents in tight.
- dantheman 7y agoIt seems that if people want this, the law should be changed. This is isn't the job of the courts.
- yardie 7y agoThe courts are very clear on other aspects of work. As any wage employee will tell you, you don't write an email if you're off the clock, you don't answer the phone if you are off the clock, and you don't do any work related task if you are off the clock. So the only question is is a bag check work related or not. And that is in the power of the courts to decide.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- moomin 7y agoChipping away at the 13th seems to be par for the course these days.
- ryanmercer 7y agoWith that logic, my commute to work should be paid too. I'm not getting paid to drive there and they won't let me work from home. If I'm not mistaken, airline flight attendants don't get paid until the door shuts, bet none of you that fly regularly are outraged about that. And as someone that worked in a facility where I had to park off site, ride a bus unpaid, clear security unpaid, ride another bus unpaid then I could clock in (on time, 1 second over was late which was penalized) then had to repeat it in reverse... I was more than happy to have the job and quite fine not getting paid doing that. Every prison guard, anyone working at UPS/USPS/FedEx sort facility, etc (not to mention people in state and federal court houses, the white house, the CIA, the FBI etc) go through this same thing every day.
- p2t2p 7y agoYes, my commute to work should be paid! The companies creating offices in places where the housing is affordable to CEOs only are tiresome. At my current job people are having 1 hour to 2.5 hour commutes just because the office located in the place where _nobody_ but the CEO can buy even an apartment. If they refuse to make me remote in this case or move office to more affordable places then they should pay for my commute.
- pwinnski 7y agoEmployees can choose--in most cases--how far away to live. Employees have no control whatsoever about standing in line to leave the warehouse. One is semi-optional, the other is mandatory.
- Maskawanian 7y agoWhen I worked at Shaw Communications in Canada we were required to work before we started getting paid as we had to be "ready to perform our duties". It was just horse shit to get free labour out of people, but that seems to be the industry.