7 ms·

"Amazon knows about it,” the driver said, “but does nothing.” But why should they as long as from Amazon's perspective, the system is working?

tzmudzin 6y ago
Slavery or child labor would work even „better“. Can you think of a reason they don‘t go that way? Of course you can argue about operating within legal limits, but the lines between employment vs contract work and contract work vs economic slavery blur easily.
- freeone3000 6y ago
  Because those are regularly-enforced laws with significant penalties. You can bet that Amazon is going to operate within all regularly enforced laws that meaningfully impact their business.
  - mattkevan 6y ago
    Those laws only exist because people decided that slavery and child labour were bad things. We can decide that this kind of exploitation is bad too. (In fact, the UK only finished paying reparations to slave-owners five years ago, 183 years after it was made illegal.)
    - RcouF1uZ4gsC 6y ago
      > (In fact, the UK only finished paying reparations to slave-owners five years ago, 183 years after it was made illegal.) That is actually slightly incorrect. The UK borrowed money to pay the reparations to the slave-owners at the time of the abolition. They just finished paying off the loan a few years ago. So the people they were paying all this time was not necessarily the slave owners, but the descendants of the creditors who had loaned the money. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_Compensation_Act_1837 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_Compensation_Act_1837
      - mattkevan 6y ago
        Ah that’s really interesting, thanks for the link.
- HumblyTossed 6y ago
  What would you have Amazon do? Tell the drivers they can't subcontract? Why can't they?
adrianmonk 6y ago
I think they may have some reasons: (1) PR. Right now because of COVID-19, the public is somewhat more attentive to stories about working conditions. (2) Morale. Happier drivers probably perform better and have less turnover. (3) Parking. If they incentivize drivers to get as close as possible to some arbitrary point, drivers could take parking spaces that should go to customers. Imposing unnecessary constraints often causes unforeseen consequences. (4) App/site security. The article says drivers download (third-party) apps that monitor Amazon's sites. It's better to make most users feel like they don't need bot apps. Once they go looking for them, they may find apps that have additional features which are not so neutral. Also, it creates a small industry of developers who specialize in doing hacky things with Amazon's systems. If I were them, I'd fix this if it's possible to do it without sacrificing other important things.
orborde 6y ago
Efficiency. If a driver has to spend 4 minutes of every hour doing stupid antics to get an order, and can earn $15/hour doing antics+delivering, then effectively $1/hour is going to pay for stupid antics, from Amazon's perspective. Amazon would like to switch those 4 minutes from "doing stupid antics" to "doing deliveries" so that they can pay the same $15/hour but get a full hour of real work instead of only 56 minutes.
- orborde 6y ago
  More concretely: Amazon's drivers (arguendo) don't care what they're getting paid $15/hour to do. If Amazon removes the incentive for antics, then it can pay 14/15 the per-delivery fee, and each driver can do 15/14 the deliveries and still make $15/hour.

tzmudzin 6y ago

Slavery or child labor would work even „better“. Can you think of a reason they don‘t go that way? Of course you can argue about operating within legal limits, but the lines between employment vs contract work and contract work vs economic slavery blur easily.

freeone3000 6y ago
Because those are regularly-enforced laws with significant penalties. You can bet that Amazon is going to operate within all regularly enforced laws that meaningfully impact their business.
- mattkevan 6y ago
  Those laws only exist because people decided that slavery and child labour were bad things. We can decide that this kind of exploitation is bad too. (In fact, the UK only finished paying reparations to slave-owners five years ago, 183 years after it was made illegal.)
  - RcouF1uZ4gsC 6y ago
    > (In fact, the UK only finished paying reparations to slave-owners five years ago, 183 years after it was made illegal.) That is actually slightly incorrect. The UK borrowed money to pay the reparations to the slave-owners at the time of the abolition. They just finished paying off the loan a few years ago. So the people they were paying all this time was not necessarily the slave owners, but the descendants of the creditors who had loaned the money. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_Compensation_Act_1837 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_Compensation_Act_1837
    - mattkevan 6y ago
      Ah that’s really interesting, thanks for the link.
HumblyTossed 6y ago
What would you have Amazon do? Tell the drivers they can't subcontract? Why can't they?

adrianmonk 6y ago

I think they may have some reasons: (1) PR. Right now because of COVID-19, the public is somewhat more attentive to stories about working conditions. (2) Morale. Happier drivers probably perform better and have less turnover. (3) Parking. If they incentivize drivers to get as close as possible to some arbitrary point, drivers could take parking spaces that should go to customers. Imposing unnecessary constraints often causes unforeseen consequences. (4) App/site security. The article says drivers download (third-party) apps that monitor Amazon's sites. It's better to make most users feel like they don't need bot apps. Once they go looking for them, they may find apps that have additional features which are not so neutral. Also, it creates a small industry of developers who specialize in doing hacky things with Amazon's systems. If I were them, I'd fix this if it's possible to do it without sacrificing other important things.

orborde 6y ago

Efficiency. If a driver has to spend 4 minutes of every hour doing stupid antics to get an order, and can earn $15/hour doing antics+delivering, then effectively $1/hour is going to pay for stupid antics, from Amazon's perspective. Amazon would like to switch those 4 minutes from "doing stupid antics" to "doing deliveries" so that they can pay the same $15/hour but get a full hour of real work instead of only 56 minutes.

orborde 6y ago
More concretely: Amazon's drivers (arguendo) don't care what they're getting paid $15/hour to do. If Amazon removes the incentive for antics, then it can pay 14/15 the per-delivery fee, and each driver can do 15/14 the deliveries and still make $15/hour.