15 ms·

honestly, i'm surprised that their demands are so few and so modest. i was expecting significantly higher numbers for the hazard pay portion of their demands.

honestly, i'm surprised that their demands are so few and so modest. i was expecting significantly higher numbers for the hazard pay portion of their demands. i can't understand what might prevent amazon and instacart from assenting to these demands as soon as they have the logistical ability to provide the necessary items to their staff. the national situation isn't permissive of corporations dragging their feet when essential services are down at the moment. on the other hand, workers treated to a hopefully quick victory will not forget this when the pandemic ends. if we're lucky, the balance of power will shift to their favor.

Frost1x 7y ago
>honestly, i'm surprised that their demands are so few and so modest. i was expecting significantly higher numbers for the hazard pay portion of their demands. "Shhh... don't let the Plebes know they're still getting robbed. We're going to fight this, negotiate something a little lower and still come out way ahead." -Our Corporate Lords and Vassels In all seriousness, it goes to show you how little people have come to expect. Some of these strikes historically have had unrealistic expectations in requests from what I recall. Labor rights have declined so far in this country that demands from strikes are now almost fully reasonable, leaving little room to negotiate back from.
londons_explore 7y ago
Workers can only demand what the market will bear, and considering there are a lot of people looking for any sort of work right now, and training up to become one of these workers doesn't take long, these workers aren't in a position to demand much. Hazard pay is moot for workers who have already caught COVID-19 too, which I would guess is a reasonably chunk of delivery workers by now.
- toomuchtodo 7y ago
  With the federal government putting what is essentially temporary UBI (as part of the "CARES Act" stimulus program) in place for those who have lost work or hours due to COVID, this is the best time to flex your labor muscle. If Amazon does not meet their demands, these folks can fall back to unemployment insurance for up to 10 months. I apologize for the wall of text below, feel free to minimize this comment ([-] sign next to delete above), but it is crucial to demonstrate how broad this support is to the working class. https://www.nytimes.com/article/coronavirus-stimulus-package-questions-answers.html https://www.nytimes.com/article/coronavirus-stimulus-package... (F.A.Q. on Stimulus Checks, Unemployment and the Coronavirus Plan) > Benefits will be expanded in an attempt to replace the average worker’s paycheck, explained Andrew Stettner, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation, a public policy research group. The average worker earns about $1,000 a week, and unemployment benefits often replace roughly 40 to 45 percent of that. The expansion will pay an extra amount to fill the gap. Under the plan, eligible workers will get an extra $600 per week on top of their state benefit. But some states are more generous than others. According to the Century Foundation, the maximum weekly benefit in Alabama is $275, but it’s $450 in California and $713 in New Jersey. > Are gig workers, freelancers and independent contractors covered? Yes, self-employed people are newly eligible for unemployment benefits. Self-employed workers will also be eligible for the additional $600 weekly benefit provided by the federal government. > If you’ve received a diagnosis, are experiencing symptoms or are seeking a diagnosis — and you’re unemployed, partly unemployed or cannot work as a result — you will be covered. The same goes if you must care for a member of your family or household who has received a diagnosis. > What if my child’s school or day care shut down? If you rely on a school, a day care or another facility to care for a child, elderly parent or another household member so that you can work — and that facility has been shut down because of coronavirus — you are eligible. > What if I’ve been advised by a health care provider to quarantine myself because of exposure to coronavirus? And what about broader orders to stay home? People who must self-quarantine are covered. The legislation also says that individuals who are unable to get to work because of a quarantine imposed as a result of the outbreak are eligible.
  - SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
    The general public is only going to support strikes to the extent that they look like protests against unacceptable treatment. If the strikers start "flexing their labor muscle" - if it looks like they're exploiting rather than responding to the crisis - the millions of unemployed Americans are going to sour on it very quickly.
    - toomuchtodo 7y ago
      We can re-evaluate in a few weeks when the healthcare system and supply chains are failing under extreme load (hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions infected). Why work a terrible job when the federal government will compensate you to remain home in safety? Meet their demands or experience pain. It's not emotional, it's economic cause and effect. I will admit I'm enjoying the schadenfreude of workers finally having some power due to a Congressional response to a pandemic, much to the chagrin of "but that's how the free market works" apologists.
      - SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
        Right, that's the framing that will make people lose sympathy. "Give us what we want or you'll be in a world of pain" is an obviously sociopathic response to a pandemic; if the organizers took such a stance I honestly think strike-breakers might be resurrected to deal with it.
        toomuchtodo 7y ago
        > if the organizers took such a stance I honestly think strike-breakers might be resurrected to deal with it. That'll sell well in an election year with states and the federal government overextending themselves already due to a woefully inadequate initial response. We can't even get masks and ventilators manufactured at the necessary rate, and we're going to send force to assist Amazon Fulfillment? We're not even sending in force to assist first responders and medical practitioners. Amazon workers have options during this, including just going home. That's Amazon's problem, not the country's. No one is entitled to cheap delivered ecommerce services. If Amazon can't make the economics work without coerced labor, good riddance.
- AmericanChopper 7y ago
  You’re getting downvoted, but this is absolutely correct. There is no reason at all you would expect the pay of low-skilled workers to increase during a period of increasing unemployment. For every union member that refuses to work without increased benefits, there’ll be a queue of newly unemployed people willing to work for less. The unions have no sway over the supply of labor here, the only thing they can exploit is the threat to temporarily disrupt service during a crisis. Something which won’t go over well with all the country’s unemployed, and everybody who’s going to have to pay the increased prices.
  - david_w 7y ago
    OK I usually agree with this but the elephant in the room is- what if some large number of those let go and also employed drop dead and people perceive it's because of Instacart/Amazon's callous attitude towards their safety? Serious question, not being combative with you. Doesn't Amazon have a very real hazard here which could result in burdensome regulation and or customer defection?
    - AmericanChopper 7y ago
      As Amazon or any of these other companies aren’t organisations devoted to the study of epidemiology or medical expertise, the only thing they can possibly do is follow the guidelines/regulations imposed on them. I’m not sure what that has to do with compensation though.
      - david_w 7y ago
        You're talking compensation not going up because too many people want the jobs and Amazon employees quit or strike because of COVID-19 working conditions so it's all connected. I appreciate that you either can't see that or don't buy it so I end my participation here having tried to make the point as clear as I could. That is not a sly way of saying "I'm right, you're wrong" by the way. I am just out of words and ideas and time to re-express the relationship again. Very best to you.
- GoodJokes 7y ago
  Workers can demand whatever they want. Can the market bear no workers....
product50 7y ago
I hope you realize that this is a sided marketplace. One side having demands means the other side has to pay for it. Now imagine all those families who are at home with many of them jobless - and them paying all these additional costs. Have empathy both ways.
- vkou 7y ago
  If five bucks, and a bottle of hand sanitizer is too much for them to pay, they are free to risk their lives, by doing their own shopping. If their job is so important that you can't make do without it, pay them more, or consider doing it yourself for less.
- munk-a 7y ago
  It's a time of emergency - the fact that the US government is AWOL when it comes to helping to subsidize necessary services like these is the real issue.
- pixelbash 7y ago
  This ignores how far the market place has listed to one side already. At this point in time I find it a little hard to summon empathy for billionaires.
  - product50 7y ago
    Just stop with this billionaires argument please and framing it as workers vs. billionaires. I am more talking about families who will have to pay more now to address some of the Union's demands.
- gaius__baltar 7y ago
  Username checks out.
  - product50 7y ago
    Go back to reddit
darksaints 7y ago
I agree that they're reasonable demands, but I'd also state that the business models were never really sustainable in the first place, so prices probably need to be raised in order to do so. I used to have a view into their delivery economics and they looked insurmountable. My friend, who currently works for Amazon's delivery program for Fresh and Now, tells me that only a few markets have achieved profitability, and even then we're talking about averaging cents per order. An increase in costs of >$5/order would mean either an increase in prices or a huge hit to cash flow.
- kevinventullo 7y ago
  Charging an extra $5/order sounds extremely reasonable given the circumstances.
  - darksaints 7y ago
    It's reasonable to me. Maybe not so reasonable to someone unemployed, diagnosed, and only buying online because they're responsibly self isolating. It's probably the right thing to do in the end, because the business model was never sustainable in the first place, but I would still think hard about how to prevent people from infecting others in an attempt to save money.
hogFeast 7y ago
This is what inflation looks like. If this continues, the US is going to be in a world of hurt (if workers demand more, guess what is happening prices). Inflation would utterly ravage the economy right now. Just generally too: if Amazon announced they were hiking prices 50% overnight, how would you react? This move is pretty scummy.
- aphextron 7y ago
  Instant grocery delivery is a luxury. Customers can and should be asked to pay more for the service. Otherwise do it yourself. It is completely unsustainable to expect an hour's worth of labor for $5.
  - rstupek 7y ago
    ...an extra $5 and minimum 10% tip, not $5 per order.
    - magicalist 7y ago
      > minimum 10% tip default to 10% instead of 5%; it's a UX nudge. The user can always change it.
      - rstupek 7y ago
        ok I read it as minimum 10%, not thinking the UI would let you change it lower.
    - aphextron 7y ago
      I'm referring to what they make now. A shopper grosses under $5/trip without tips.
  - jahaja 7y ago
    This. So much. People are behaving like it's an essential utility for the broader public, rather than a luxury for the (upper) middle-class. Usually sounds very similar with Uber and other low-paying services.
creato 7y ago
An extra $5 per order might be a lot... I don't know how many orders per day is typical, but it wouldn't take that many orders for this to add up to a pretty significant amount.
- Munky-Necan 7y ago
  We're talking about someone seriously increasing their likelihood for contracting a potentially life threatening illness. 5$ per potential exposure is not exactly that much considering the gravity of the situation.
  - grumple 7y ago
    Aren't they dropping off the products in cardboard boxes without ever coming near another human?
    - mayneack 7y ago
      They're also spending half their time in grocery stores.
      - grumple 7y ago
        Aren't the people who prepare the order different than the people that deliver it? The preparers are the ones who need the hazard pay and protections imo.
        jianshen 7y ago
        Not always and I'd suspect that being a "Full-Service Shopper" (vs "In-Store Shopper") pays better so a large percentage are likely both preparer and deliverer. Source: https://shoppers.instacart.com/ https://shoppers.instacart.com/
        jackson1442 7y ago
        FSS are paid by the order–you see a preview of how much you'll make before accepting an order (broken down into IC pay, mileage pay, and customer tip). ISS are paid by the hour and sign on with an hourly wage agreement. Haven't worked as an ISS, but I presume that they have no say in their orders as they aren't paid per order. I actually have no idea if they even get a portion of tips. source: have run for Instacart before.
GoodJokes 7y ago
Oh dear, you really do think Amazon might care.
jackson1442 7y ago
> honestly, i'm surprised that their demands are so few and so modest The biggest problem here is that this is one of the most "expendable" workforces we've ever seen–hiring cost is rock-bottom, training is done through an app (requiring no human interaction or pay), and shoppers are just sent a shirt and prepaid card (Shipt) or a lanyard and card (Instacart). I feel like the organizers understand this and know that if the overlords decide they don't want to deal with the strike, their accounts can be deactivated with the click of a mouse, wasting less than $50 in resources (though usually less because of the ROI they've already exhibited). All the company has to do is ramp up advertising or add some new hire incentives. Keeping the demands reasonable is how they're self-preserving. Anything too extreme, and they just get replaced with no change. It's a good _starting point_, but there definitely need to be more protections for our gig economy workers in the future.

Frost1x 7y ago

>honestly, i'm surprised that their demands are so few and so modest. i was expecting significantly higher numbers for the hazard pay portion of their demands. "Shhh... don't let the Plebes know they're still getting robbed. We're going to fight this, negotiate something a little lower and still come out way ahead." -Our Corporate Lords and Vassels In all seriousness, it goes to show you how little people have come to expect. Some of these strikes historically have had unrealistic expectations in requests from what I recall. Labor rights have declined so far in this country that demands from strikes are now almost fully reasonable, leaving little room to negotiate back from.

londons_explore 7y ago

Workers can only demand what the market will bear, and considering there are a lot of people looking for any sort of work right now, and training up to become one of these workers doesn't take long, these workers aren't in a position to demand much. Hazard pay is moot for workers who have already caught COVID-19 too, which I would guess is a reasonably chunk of delivery workers by now.

toomuchtodo 7y ago
With the federal government putting what is essentially temporary UBI (as part of the "CARES Act" stimulus program) in place for those who have lost work or hours due to COVID, this is the best time to flex your labor muscle. If Amazon does not meet their demands, these folks can fall back to unemployment insurance for up to 10 months. I apologize for the wall of text below, feel free to minimize this comment ([-] sign next to delete above), but it is crucial to demonstrate how broad this support is to the working class. https://www.nytimes.com/article/coronavirus-stimulus-package-questions-answers.html https://www.nytimes.com/article/coronavirus-stimulus-package... (F.A.Q. on Stimulus Checks, Unemployment and the Coronavirus Plan) > Benefits will be expanded in an attempt to replace the average worker’s paycheck, explained Andrew Stettner, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation, a public policy research group. The average worker earns about $1,000 a week, and unemployment benefits often replace roughly 40 to 45 percent of that. The expansion will pay an extra amount to fill the gap. Under the plan, eligible workers will get an extra $600 per week on top of their state benefit. But some states are more generous than others. According to the Century Foundation, the maximum weekly benefit in Alabama is $275, but it’s $450 in California and $713 in New Jersey. > Are gig workers, freelancers and independent contractors covered? Yes, self-employed people are newly eligible for unemployment benefits. Self-employed workers will also be eligible for the additional $600 weekly benefit provided by the federal government. > If you’ve received a diagnosis, are experiencing symptoms or are seeking a diagnosis — and you’re unemployed, partly unemployed or cannot work as a result — you will be covered. The same goes if you must care for a member of your family or household who has received a diagnosis. > What if my child’s school or day care shut down? If you rely on a school, a day care or another facility to care for a child, elderly parent or another household member so that you can work — and that facility has been shut down because of coronavirus — you are eligible. > What if I’ve been advised by a health care provider to quarantine myself because of exposure to coronavirus? And what about broader orders to stay home? People who must self-quarantine are covered. The legislation also says that individuals who are unable to get to work because of a quarantine imposed as a result of the outbreak are eligible.
- SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
  The general public is only going to support strikes to the extent that they look like protests against unacceptable treatment. If the strikers start "flexing their labor muscle" - if it looks like they're exploiting rather than responding to the crisis - the millions of unemployed Americans are going to sour on it very quickly.
  - toomuchtodo 7y ago
    We can re-evaluate in a few weeks when the healthcare system and supply chains are failing under extreme load (hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions infected). Why work a terrible job when the federal government will compensate you to remain home in safety? Meet their demands or experience pain. It's not emotional, it's economic cause and effect. I will admit I'm enjoying the schadenfreude of workers finally having some power due to a Congressional response to a pandemic, much to the chagrin of "but that's how the free market works" apologists.
    - SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
      Right, that's the framing that will make people lose sympathy. "Give us what we want or you'll be in a world of pain" is an obviously sociopathic response to a pandemic; if the organizers took such a stance I honestly think strike-breakers might be resurrected to deal with it.
      - toomuchtodo 7y ago
        > if the organizers took such a stance I honestly think strike-breakers might be resurrected to deal with it. That'll sell well in an election year with states and the federal government overextending themselves already due to a woefully inadequate initial response. We can't even get masks and ventilators manufactured at the necessary rate, and we're going to send force to assist Amazon Fulfillment? We're not even sending in force to assist first responders and medical practitioners. Amazon workers have options during this, including just going home. That's Amazon's problem, not the country's. No one is entitled to cheap delivered ecommerce services. If Amazon can't make the economics work without coerced labor, good riddance.
AmericanChopper 7y ago
You’re getting downvoted, but this is absolutely correct. There is no reason at all you would expect the pay of low-skilled workers to increase during a period of increasing unemployment. For every union member that refuses to work without increased benefits, there’ll be a queue of newly unemployed people willing to work for less. The unions have no sway over the supply of labor here, the only thing they can exploit is the threat to temporarily disrupt service during a crisis. Something which won’t go over well with all the country’s unemployed, and everybody who’s going to have to pay the increased prices.
- david_w 7y ago
  OK I usually agree with this but the elephant in the room is- what if some large number of those let go and also employed drop dead and people perceive it's because of Instacart/Amazon's callous attitude towards their safety? Serious question, not being combative with you. Doesn't Amazon have a very real hazard here which could result in burdensome regulation and or customer defection?
  - AmericanChopper 7y ago
    As Amazon or any of these other companies aren’t organisations devoted to the study of epidemiology or medical expertise, the only thing they can possibly do is follow the guidelines/regulations imposed on them. I’m not sure what that has to do with compensation though.
    - david_w 7y ago
      You're talking compensation not going up because too many people want the jobs and Amazon employees quit or strike because of COVID-19 working conditions so it's all connected. I appreciate that you either can't see that or don't buy it so I end my participation here having tried to make the point as clear as I could. That is not a sly way of saying "I'm right, you're wrong" by the way. I am just out of words and ideas and time to re-express the relationship again. Very best to you.
GoodJokes 7y ago
Workers can demand whatever they want. Can the market bear no workers....

product50 7y ago

I hope you realize that this is a sided marketplace. One side having demands means the other side has to pay for it. Now imagine all those families who are at home with many of them jobless - and them paying all these additional costs. Have empathy both ways.

vkou 7y ago
If five bucks, and a bottle of hand sanitizer is too much for them to pay, they are free to risk their lives, by doing their own shopping. If their job is so important that you can't make do without it, pay them more, or consider doing it yourself for less.
munk-a 7y ago
It's a time of emergency - the fact that the US government is AWOL when it comes to helping to subsidize necessary services like these is the real issue.
pixelbash 7y ago
This ignores how far the market place has listed to one side already. At this point in time I find it a little hard to summon empathy for billionaires.
- product50 7y ago
  Just stop with this billionaires argument please and framing it as workers vs. billionaires. I am more talking about families who will have to pay more now to address some of the Union's demands.
gaius__baltar 7y ago
Username checks out.
- product50 7y ago
  Go back to reddit

darksaints 7y ago

I agree that they're reasonable demands, but I'd also state that the business models were never really sustainable in the first place, so prices probably need to be raised in order to do so. I used to have a view into their delivery economics and they looked insurmountable. My friend, who currently works for Amazon's delivery program for Fresh and Now, tells me that only a few markets have achieved profitability, and even then we're talking about averaging cents per order. An increase in costs of >$5/order would mean either an increase in prices or a huge hit to cash flow.

kevinventullo 7y ago
Charging an extra $5/order sounds extremely reasonable given the circumstances.
- darksaints 7y ago
  It's reasonable to me. Maybe not so reasonable to someone unemployed, diagnosed, and only buying online because they're responsibly self isolating. It's probably the right thing to do in the end, because the business model was never sustainable in the first place, but I would still think hard about how to prevent people from infecting others in an attempt to save money.

hogFeast 7y ago

This is what inflation looks like. If this continues, the US is going to be in a world of hurt (if workers demand more, guess what is happening prices). Inflation would utterly ravage the economy right now. Just generally too: if Amazon announced they were hiking prices 50% overnight, how would you react? This move is pretty scummy.

aphextron 7y ago
Instant grocery delivery is a luxury. Customers can and should be asked to pay more for the service. Otherwise do it yourself. It is completely unsustainable to expect an hour's worth of labor for $5.
- rstupek 7y ago
  ...an extra $5 and minimum 10% tip, not $5 per order.
  - magicalist 7y ago
    > minimum 10% tip default to 10% instead of 5%; it's a UX nudge. The user can always change it.
    - rstupek 7y ago
      ok I read it as minimum 10%, not thinking the UI would let you change it lower.
  - aphextron 7y ago
    I'm referring to what they make now. A shopper grosses under $5/trip without tips.
- jahaja 7y ago
  This. So much. People are behaving like it's an essential utility for the broader public, rather than a luxury for the (upper) middle-class. Usually sounds very similar with Uber and other low-paying services.

creato 7y ago

An extra $5 per order might be a lot... I don't know how many orders per day is typical, but it wouldn't take that many orders for this to add up to a pretty significant amount.

Munky-Necan 7y ago
We're talking about someone seriously increasing their likelihood for contracting a potentially life threatening illness. 5$ per potential exposure is not exactly that much considering the gravity of the situation.
- grumple 7y ago
  Aren't they dropping off the products in cardboard boxes without ever coming near another human?
  - mayneack 7y ago
    They're also spending half their time in grocery stores.
    - grumple 7y ago
      Aren't the people who prepare the order different than the people that deliver it? The preparers are the ones who need the hazard pay and protections imo.
      - jianshen 7y ago
        Not always and I'd suspect that being a "Full-Service Shopper" (vs "In-Store Shopper") pays better so a large percentage are likely both preparer and deliverer. Source: https://shoppers.instacart.com/ https://shoppers.instacart.com/
        jackson1442 7y ago
        FSS are paid by the order–you see a preview of how much you'll make before accepting an order (broken down into IC pay, mileage pay, and customer tip). ISS are paid by the hour and sign on with an hourly wage agreement. Haven't worked as an ISS, but I presume that they have no say in their orders as they aren't paid per order. I actually have no idea if they even get a portion of tips. source: have run for Instacart before.

GoodJokes 7y ago

Oh dear, you really do think Amazon might care.

jackson1442 7y ago

> honestly, i'm surprised that their demands are so few and so modest The biggest problem here is that this is one of the most "expendable" workforces we've ever seen–hiring cost is rock-bottom, training is done through an app (requiring no human interaction or pay), and shoppers are just sent a shirt and prepaid card (Shipt) or a lanyard and card (Instacart). I feel like the organizers understand this and know that if the overlords decide they don't want to deal with the strike, their accounts can be deactivated with the click of a mouse, wasting less than $50 in resources (though usually less because of the ROI they've already exhibited). All the company has to do is ramp up advertising or add some new hire incentives. Keeping the demands reasonable is how they're self-preserving. Anything too extreme, and they just get replaced with no change. It's a good _starting point_, but there definitely need to be more protections for our gig economy workers in the future.