20 ms·

Keep in mind though that this resilience is at the expense of thousands of workers who have to forego their own social distancing and risk their own healths so

Keep in mind though that this resilience is at the expense of thousands of workers who have to forego their own social distancing and risk their own healths so that we can get our next prime delivery in 3-4 days. Amazon isn't run by robots. There are real humans who are going through hell to support this increase in demand.

mattacular 7y ago
It's also worth pointing out under (the old) normal conditions Amazon warehouse workers already had to put their health and wellbeing at risk every shift. I'm not familiar with health benefits for the average Amazon distribution center worker but I hope they get something more than BezosBux to spend at whatever urgent care operator happens to be a sister company. Amazon has always exploited its labor force; that's why they are in the position to dial things up as needed to meet demand surges.
- krapp 7y ago
  Amazon's health benefits are actually quite good for entry level positions. Those benefits are a big reason Amazon's warehouse workers put up with the low wages and exploitation, at least in the US.
  - dangus 7y ago
    And that’s the disgusting part of our system. We can’t switch jobs or start a business because our health and well being is tied up with an employer. It’s possible that switching jobs means switching doctors or foregoing care. And I’d say that the worst part about employers subsidizing healthcare is that they gladly do it because it’s essentially untaxed salary. If my employer wasn’t allowed to subsidize healthcare, they’d have to pay me more and that extra pay would be subject to payroll tax. So the whole system incentivizes employers to lobby for this terrible system of employer-based private for-profit health insurance. Big companies love it because it’s a way in which they can trap employees and snuff out competition from smaller businesses.
    - erik_seaberg 7y ago
      I'm not sure how glad. Health insurance is a cost center, your employer probably has no competitive advantage in getting it, and employees seem to undervalue it (everyone who starts COBRA is shocked how expensive the coverage always was).
- BurningFrog 7y ago
  Amazon provides perfectly good blue collar jobs. That woke academics see physical labor as hell says a lot about them, and about the disconnect between these entirely separate communities.
  - bobthechef 7y ago
    I'd like to balance all of this concern for the worker with a broader perspective. Consider that business isn't charity. If Amazon made a promise to deliver in 2 days, and I'm paying for that benefit, doesn't that mean I have the right to demand that benefit or be compensated? Does a pandemic mean that Amazon has the right to profit at my expense? Isn't it a bit self-centered to say "Well, I can afford to toss money away on Prime membership without reaping the benefits, therefore anyone can"? What about those who rely on Prime membership and use it heavily but aren't rich enough to waste money on a service that isn't provided? Now if normal delivery endangers the health and lives of deliverymen, then would it not make sense to ask for compensation from Amazon?
    - res0nat0r 7y ago
      Only if your refund doesn't go to you but directly in the pockets of the workers, then yes.
      - lonelappde 7y ago
        Why would I pay Amazon's workers for not delivering on managements promise? The entrepreneur should pay. Management should pay the workers to work, and only take money from customers for services delivered as promised. If Prime prices go up after current contracts expire, that's fine. Jeff Bezos doesn't need my charity.
        res0nat0r 7y ago
        HN bubble in full effect right here. Congrats on your privileged life right now friend.
  - 7y ago
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
Kaiyou 7y ago
I'm willing to sacrifice the well-being of other people for my own benefits. Otherwise I'd be in a moral dilemma just going shopping in a supermarket.
- Timpy 7y ago
  And you don't find sacrificing the well-being of others to be a moral dilemma?
  - Kaiyou 7y ago
    It's a sacrifice, yes, but I can buy chocolate without being anguished that it got the blood of children from third-world countries on it. Doesn't everyone silently accept these things by living in modern society? I mean, sure, some people love to pretend that they really care, but none of them sacrifice their own benefits, instead choosing, like me, to sacrifice the benefits of other people. There's no dilemma once I've chosen a position. The dilemma is having to choose if you want to sacrifice your benefits, by for example not buying a smartphone, or the benefits of other people, by supporting the exploitation of other people through your purchasing power.
    - bluntfang 7y ago
      You're being downvoted, but you're right. We've all had blood on our hands for a long time. It's funny how it means more to people when it's right in front of their eyes.
    - paulmd 7y ago
      Ursula K LeGuin's short story "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas" is an interesting meditation on this. https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:IZDmzkZ0u5sJ:https://canvas.wayne.edu/files/3466337/download%3Fdownload_frd%3D1+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-b-1-d https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:IZDmzk... Yes, generally we do just silently accept these things. You're typing this on a PC or phone built using slave labor using minerals extracted by warlords to fund campaigns of oppression (despite some companies paying lip service to these issues it really still affects all electronic devices). When you are finished with them, they will be sent to Africa and burned in open landfills by hand to extract valuable minerals. Our oil market is based on dictators extracting their nation's wealth and using it to fund terror, in some cases literally on us. Nobody in the modern world walks away from Omelas.
SkyMarshal 7y ago
Theoretically a company like Amazon should be able to provide masks, goggles and health monitoring to its workers to minimize the possibility of a COVID19 outbreak among them. It’s in Amazon’s business interests to do so (or risk business disruption due to outbreak among their workforce). It’s also better for society that the congregations of people shift from many geographically scattered and difficult-to-monitor locations to a few single operations like Amazon warehouses that can be very closely monitored and screened for COVID19. Amazon’s warehouses can be more cheaply monitored and supplied with PPE than all of society can. This should probably be part of SOP for responding to outbreaks like this.
- owenmarshall 7y ago
  They could theoretically. They could also theoretically provide adequate bathroom breaks for their workers. Previous history hints at what we will see.
  - lonelappde 7y ago
    Amazon jobs require a strong bladder and God bladder management. They retain people with strong bladders and good bladder management. If they couldn't fill the roles with strong bladder employees, they'd have to relax that requirement.
    - m463 7y ago
      Now they're going to have strong bladder management + strong touch your face management. :) On a more serious note, I wonder if there are scenarios where asymptomatic carriers can contaminate packages sent to many geographically diverse locations?
- capableweb 7y ago
  > Theoretically a company like Amazon should be able to provide masks, goggles and health monitoring to its workers Theoretically yeah, but practically Amazon is driven by people with short-term profits in mind, so you don't see this happening. In the ideal world, capitalists realizes that if their customers / workforce goes out of jobs because of sickness, they won't earn as much. But seems that's too much future thinking, so business are trying to extract as much value they can before they'll be forced to shut down.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
tibbon 7y ago
There are a lot of humans there- but also a lot of robots too. (I know a bunch of people at Amazon Robotics. Without the robots many more people would need to be contacting each other)
lonelappde 7y ago
Is a warehouse a crowded environment?

mattacular 7y ago

It's also worth pointing out under (the old) normal conditions Amazon warehouse workers already had to put their health and wellbeing at risk every shift. I'm not familiar with health benefits for the average Amazon distribution center worker but I hope they get something more than BezosBux to spend at whatever urgent care operator happens to be a sister company. Amazon has always exploited its labor force; that's why they are in the position to dial things up as needed to meet demand surges.

krapp 7y ago
Amazon's health benefits are actually quite good for entry level positions. Those benefits are a big reason Amazon's warehouse workers put up with the low wages and exploitation, at least in the US.
- dangus 7y ago
  And that’s the disgusting part of our system. We can’t switch jobs or start a business because our health and well being is tied up with an employer. It’s possible that switching jobs means switching doctors or foregoing care. And I’d say that the worst part about employers subsidizing healthcare is that they gladly do it because it’s essentially untaxed salary. If my employer wasn’t allowed to subsidize healthcare, they’d have to pay me more and that extra pay would be subject to payroll tax. So the whole system incentivizes employers to lobby for this terrible system of employer-based private for-profit health insurance. Big companies love it because it’s a way in which they can trap employees and snuff out competition from smaller businesses.
  - erik_seaberg 7y ago
    I'm not sure how glad. Health insurance is a cost center, your employer probably has no competitive advantage in getting it, and employees seem to undervalue it (everyone who starts COBRA is shocked how expensive the coverage always was).
BurningFrog 7y ago
Amazon provides perfectly good blue collar jobs. That woke academics see physical labor as hell says a lot about them, and about the disconnect between these entirely separate communities.
- bobthechef 7y ago
  I'd like to balance all of this concern for the worker with a broader perspective. Consider that business isn't charity. If Amazon made a promise to deliver in 2 days, and I'm paying for that benefit, doesn't that mean I have the right to demand that benefit or be compensated? Does a pandemic mean that Amazon has the right to profit at my expense? Isn't it a bit self-centered to say "Well, I can afford to toss money away on Prime membership without reaping the benefits, therefore anyone can"? What about those who rely on Prime membership and use it heavily but aren't rich enough to waste money on a service that isn't provided? Now if normal delivery endangers the health and lives of deliverymen, then would it not make sense to ask for compensation from Amazon?
  - res0nat0r 7y ago
    Only if your refund doesn't go to you but directly in the pockets of the workers, then yes.
    - lonelappde 7y ago
      Why would I pay Amazon's workers for not delivering on managements promise? The entrepreneur should pay. Management should pay the workers to work, and only take money from customers for services delivered as promised. If Prime prices go up after current contracts expire, that's fine. Jeff Bezos doesn't need my charity.
      - res0nat0r 7y ago
        HN bubble in full effect right here. Congrats on your privileged life right now friend.
- 7y ago
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

Kaiyou 7y ago

I'm willing to sacrifice the well-being of other people for my own benefits. Otherwise I'd be in a moral dilemma just going shopping in a supermarket.

Timpy 7y ago
And you don't find sacrificing the well-being of others to be a moral dilemma?
- Kaiyou 7y ago
  It's a sacrifice, yes, but I can buy chocolate without being anguished that it got the blood of children from third-world countries on it. Doesn't everyone silently accept these things by living in modern society? I mean, sure, some people love to pretend that they really care, but none of them sacrifice their own benefits, instead choosing, like me, to sacrifice the benefits of other people. There's no dilemma once I've chosen a position. The dilemma is having to choose if you want to sacrifice your benefits, by for example not buying a smartphone, or the benefits of other people, by supporting the exploitation of other people through your purchasing power.
  - bluntfang 7y ago
    You're being downvoted, but you're right. We've all had blood on our hands for a long time. It's funny how it means more to people when it's right in front of their eyes.
  - paulmd 7y ago
    Ursula K LeGuin's short story "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas" is an interesting meditation on this. https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:IZDmzkZ0u5sJ:https://canvas.wayne.edu/files/3466337/download%3Fdownload_frd%3D1+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-b-1-d https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:IZDmzk... Yes, generally we do just silently accept these things. You're typing this on a PC or phone built using slave labor using minerals extracted by warlords to fund campaigns of oppression (despite some companies paying lip service to these issues it really still affects all electronic devices). When you are finished with them, they will be sent to Africa and burned in open landfills by hand to extract valuable minerals. Our oil market is based on dictators extracting their nation's wealth and using it to fund terror, in some cases literally on us. Nobody in the modern world walks away from Omelas.

SkyMarshal 7y ago

Theoretically a company like Amazon should be able to provide masks, goggles and health monitoring to its workers to minimize the possibility of a COVID19 outbreak among them. It’s in Amazon’s business interests to do so (or risk business disruption due to outbreak among their workforce). It’s also better for society that the congregations of people shift from many geographically scattered and difficult-to-monitor locations to a few single operations like Amazon warehouses that can be very closely monitored and screened for COVID19. Amazon’s warehouses can be more cheaply monitored and supplied with PPE than all of society can. This should probably be part of SOP for responding to outbreaks like this.

owenmarshall 7y ago
They could theoretically. They could also theoretically provide adequate bathroom breaks for their workers. Previous history hints at what we will see.
- lonelappde 7y ago
  Amazon jobs require a strong bladder and God bladder management. They retain people with strong bladders and good bladder management. If they couldn't fill the roles with strong bladder employees, they'd have to relax that requirement.
  - m463 7y ago
    Now they're going to have strong bladder management + strong touch your face management. :) On a more serious note, I wonder if there are scenarios where asymptomatic carriers can contaminate packages sent to many geographically diverse locations?
capableweb 7y ago
> Theoretically a company like Amazon should be able to provide masks, goggles and health monitoring to its workers Theoretically yeah, but practically Amazon is driven by people with short-term profits in mind, so you don't see this happening. In the ideal world, capitalists realizes that if their customers / workforce goes out of jobs because of sickness, they won't earn as much. But seems that's too much future thinking, so business are trying to extract as much value they can before they'll be forced to shut down.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

tibbon 7y ago

There are a lot of humans there- but also a lot of robots too. (I know a bunch of people at Amazon Robotics. Without the robots many more people would need to be contacting each other)

lonelappde 7y ago

Is a warehouse a crowded environment?