5 ms·

Amazon is firing them for commenting publicly on its business. If you were employed by a company and disparaged them publicly, breaking company policy, would y

by alehul 6y ago

Amazon is firing them for commenting publicly on its business. If you were employed by a company and disparaged them publicly, breaking company policy, would you believe that your employment with them is in any way protected?

tyingq 6y ago
I agree with you. Amazon, should though, be aware of the Streisand effect. They are amplifying their problem by firing people instead of, say...reprimanding them.
- kube-system 6y ago
  > Amazon.com Inc (AMZN.O) said on Tuesday it terminated two employees, who criticized the working conditions It doesn't sound like Amazon is attempting to hide anything here.
  - tyingq 6y ago
    By firing them, they are reinforcing the idea they they don't care about working conditions. A reprimand likely wouldn't have made the news. I assume they want less buzz about work conditions.
    - kube-system 6y ago
      The Streisand effect is when someone actively takes actions to hide information, but it backfires. I haven't seen any evidence of them taking actions to hide any information. >I assume they want less buzz about work conditions. I don't think this is the case. They have been public about responding to the media and have been posting daily updates through their own site. The link to their blog discussing workers' conditions is on the front page of Amazon.com.
      - tyingq 6y ago
        Firing outspoken employees counts as an attempt to suppress information to me. The firing itself becoming news is the backfire. They essentially gave the warehouse conditions an extra news cycle.
        kube-system 6y ago
        We may be missing information here, but I am not sure these employees even had any first-hand information to suppress. I went to their twitter pages and couldn't find any myself.
        tyingq 6y ago
        It doesn't matter whether they had any actual info. It's the perception. Firing them feeds it further.
    - greedo 6y ago
      The power imbalance makes it easy for Amazon to act like this. Even if they get sued and lose, they have billions. It's like when Google got fined by the EU, and it was just a day's profit. Amazon is a shredder; so large that it just wipes out swaths of businesses, leaving broken employees in its wake.
mc32 6y ago
Here’s my take. If I think a company is doing wrong and I believe I should stand against it, I would then consider that taking a stand will likely result in termination; but if I believe strongly then I’d do it because of principle not be cause a law is protecting me. That’s not to say I disagree with workers’ protections only tat if you believe strongly then protections or not should not be much of a consideration. That said, is Amazon acting illegally so you’re calling that out or do I just disagree with their position?
- wushupork 6y ago
  I agree, but I should not be surprised if they terminated me because of it.
  - alexandercrohde 6y ago
    Maybe not surprised, but morally outraged certainly
    - mc32 6y ago
      I’m not sure. Let’s say me and my neighbor borrow things from each other and have an okay relationship. Maybe some time later they think I underpaid them for a used car when they find out I sold it for double the price. They don’t talk to me and we’re not friends any longer. Do I get outraged at them? Should they be outraged at me? Did anyone of us do anything illegal?
Sharlin 6y ago
Yes, in just about any Western jurisdiction that isn't the US. The degree of loyalty expected from a rank-and-file employee is not very high. If you're a high-level executive it's different. Great power, great responsibility and so on.
YokoZar 6y ago
Such policies are facially illegal under the National Labor Relations Act, which guarantees workers the right to engaged in protected concerted activity, such as discussing their working conditions with eachother, the press, and the public. The tweets that got these two fired were explicitly about working conditions. Google had a similar policy and, after losing NLRA cases, had to issue a notice to all employees saying that its previous policies no longer included discussing working conditions with the public. Amazon will likely get sued over this, and very likely lose in a similar matter, as their conduct here is even more egregious.
- cperciva 6y ago
  Except they weren't discussing their working conditions. They were discussing other people's working conditions.
  - YokoZar 6y ago
    Other people who work at the same company. You are attempting to split hairs that the law doesn't have. Firing designers for complaining about their unsanitary working conditions is illegal. Firing warehouse workers for complaining about their unsanitary working conditions is illegal. Firing designers and warehouse workers for attempting to organize together is illegal. Firing designers for talking about someone else's working conditions isn't "one weird trick" for avoiding the law here.
    - asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
      > You are attempting to split hairs that the law doesn't have. You are a lawyer and are making this claim as someone who is educated in labor law? Or you have a citation to share with us, or something of that nature? Perhaps the chapter and verse of the law that makes this move illegal? Or a case where it was found that workers have the right to publicly comment on other workers' working conditions as long as they work at the same company?
      - 6y ago

by alehul 6y ago

tyingq 6y ago

I agree with you. Amazon, should though, be aware of the Streisand effect. They are amplifying their problem by firing people instead of, say...reprimanding them.

kube-system 6y ago
> Amazon.com Inc (AMZN.O) said on Tuesday it terminated two employees, who criticized the working conditions It doesn't sound like Amazon is attempting to hide anything here.
- tyingq 6y ago
  By firing them, they are reinforcing the idea they they don't care about working conditions. A reprimand likely wouldn't have made the news. I assume they want less buzz about work conditions.
  - kube-system 6y ago
    The Streisand effect is when someone actively takes actions to hide information, but it backfires. I haven't seen any evidence of them taking actions to hide any information. >I assume they want less buzz about work conditions. I don't think this is the case. They have been public about responding to the media and have been posting daily updates through their own site. The link to their blog discussing workers' conditions is on the front page of Amazon.com.
    - tyingq 6y ago
      Firing outspoken employees counts as an attempt to suppress information to me. The firing itself becoming news is the backfire. They essentially gave the warehouse conditions an extra news cycle.
      - kube-system 6y ago
        We may be missing information here, but I am not sure these employees even had any first-hand information to suppress. I went to their twitter pages and couldn't find any myself.
        tyingq 6y ago
        It doesn't matter whether they had any actual info. It's the perception. Firing them feeds it further.
  - greedo 6y ago
    The power imbalance makes it easy for Amazon to act like this. Even if they get sued and lose, they have billions. It's like when Google got fined by the EU, and it was just a day's profit. Amazon is a shredder; so large that it just wipes out swaths of businesses, leaving broken employees in its wake.

mc32 6y ago

Here’s my take. If I think a company is doing wrong and I believe I should stand against it, I would then consider that taking a stand will likely result in termination; but if I believe strongly then I’d do it because of principle not be cause a law is protecting me. That’s not to say I disagree with workers’ protections only tat if you believe strongly then protections or not should not be much of a consideration. That said, is Amazon acting illegally so you’re calling that out or do I just disagree with their position?

wushupork 6y ago
I agree, but I should not be surprised if they terminated me because of it.
- alexandercrohde 6y ago
  Maybe not surprised, but morally outraged certainly
  - mc32 6y ago
    I’m not sure. Let’s say me and my neighbor borrow things from each other and have an okay relationship. Maybe some time later they think I underpaid them for a used car when they find out I sold it for double the price. They don’t talk to me and we’re not friends any longer. Do I get outraged at them? Should they be outraged at me? Did anyone of us do anything illegal?

Sharlin 6y ago

Yes, in just about any Western jurisdiction that isn't the US. The degree of loyalty expected from a rank-and-file employee is not very high. If you're a high-level executive it's different. Great power, great responsibility and so on.

YokoZar 6y ago

Such policies are facially illegal under the National Labor Relations Act, which guarantees workers the right to engaged in protected concerted activity, such as discussing their working conditions with eachother, the press, and the public. The tweets that got these two fired were explicitly about working conditions. Google had a similar policy and, after losing NLRA cases, had to issue a notice to all employees saying that its previous policies no longer included discussing working conditions with the public. Amazon will likely get sued over this, and very likely lose in a similar matter, as their conduct here is even more egregious.

cperciva 6y ago
Except they weren't discussing their working conditions. They were discussing other people's working conditions.
- YokoZar 6y ago
  Other people who work at the same company. You are attempting to split hairs that the law doesn't have. Firing designers for complaining about their unsanitary working conditions is illegal. Firing warehouse workers for complaining about their unsanitary working conditions is illegal. Firing designers and warehouse workers for attempting to organize together is illegal. Firing designers for talking about someone else's working conditions isn't "one weird trick" for avoiding the law here.
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
    > You are attempting to split hairs that the law doesn't have. You are a lawyer and are making this claim as someone who is educated in labor law? Or you have a citation to share with us, or something of that nature? Perhaps the chapter and verse of the law that makes this move illegal? Or a case where it was found that workers have the right to publicly comment on other workers' working conditions as long as they work at the same company?
    - 6y ago