4 ms·

Silos are standard in all big organizations, full access is/was the exception in Amazon. Why should it be the corporation's duty to make it easier for employees

Silos are standard in all big organizations, full access is/was the exception in Amazon. Why should it be the corporation's duty to make it easier for employees to organization a union if it's not something that the executives deemed in the best interest of the corporation? (I am not anti-union per-se at all, you can silence me by downvoting but you'll also be creating your own echo chamber in the process)

vkou 6y ago
> Silos are standard in all big organizations, full access is/was the exception in Amazon. Why should it be the corporation's duty to make it easier for employees to organization a union if it's not something that the executives deemed in the best interest of the corporation? Nobody's forcing Amazon to not be siloed, but now they are losing a competitive advantage, because this disrupts communication within the company. There's a reason for why its leadership made a conscious choice to not be a siloed firm - and its because silos are less efficient. It's much like a repressive society that shuts down the internet, because people are using it to organize against the regime. Sure, it's free to do so, but this has negative consequences for its ability to conduct bureaucratic and economic activity. The difference between a government and Amazon is that Amazon does not have any control over non-work communication channels their employees use - so this move isn't even going to help much.
- sn_master 6y ago
  > now they are losing a competitive advantage I don't think they're doing anything out of ideological reasons. Their bonuses and compensation is always tied to their competitive performance. I am sure the higher-ups weighed the potential loss of competitive advantage when making the decision, and given their successful track record, I am inclined to believe it's not going to be as bad as the article is portraying it.
  - vkou 6y ago
    > I am sure the higher-ups weighed the potential loss of competitive advantage when making the decision, and given their successful track record, I am inclined to believe it's not going to be as bad as the article is portraying it. I'm sure they haven't - and are just reacting in the way that any C-suite American executive reacts to a union forming in their company - by making every attempt, sensible or senseless, to suppress it.
    - sn_master 6y ago
      They're the business owners and responsible for their business decisions. I don't think we have the decades of experience they have managing trillion-dollar organizations. This is the first time I am seeing that many people claiming they're upset because Amazon made a decision they think is bad for its own business.
  - Spooky23 6y ago
    Senior Executives aren’t the Jedi council or whatever. Someone probably discovered somebody dumping the GAL and the big shots made an emotional decision.
    - sn_master 6y ago
      Any intern can still dump the GAL, they only removed access for warehouse workers, not for software engineers.
ipsocannibal 6y ago
The problem is lying about why a company is taking an action. A lie by omission is still a lie. How do you "Earn Trust" with your employees by taking this action and meeting their concerns with silence? If you think unions are going to be the death of your company then make your case and state when a change is intended to inhibit union organizing. Thats not whats happening according to the article. Is lying standard in all big organizations, and more importantly should it be?
- ipsocannibal 6y ago
  I guess lying is becoming more of a standard practice at Amazon, https://theintercept.com/2021/03/25/amazon-drivers-pee-bottles-union/ https://theintercept.com/2021/03/25/amazon-drivers-pee-bottl...

vkou 6y ago

> Silos are standard in all big organizations, full access is/was the exception in Amazon. Why should it be the corporation's duty to make it easier for employees to organization a union if it's not something that the executives deemed in the best interest of the corporation? Nobody's forcing Amazon to not be siloed, but now they are losing a competitive advantage, because this disrupts communication within the company. There's a reason for why its leadership made a conscious choice to not be a siloed firm - and its because silos are less efficient. It's much like a repressive society that shuts down the internet, because people are using it to organize against the regime. Sure, it's free to do so, but this has negative consequences for its ability to conduct bureaucratic and economic activity. The difference between a government and Amazon is that Amazon does not have any control over non-work communication channels their employees use - so this move isn't even going to help much.

sn_master 6y ago
> now they are losing a competitive advantage I don't think they're doing anything out of ideological reasons. Their bonuses and compensation is always tied to their competitive performance. I am sure the higher-ups weighed the potential loss of competitive advantage when making the decision, and given their successful track record, I am inclined to believe it's not going to be as bad as the article is portraying it.
- vkou 6y ago
  > I am sure the higher-ups weighed the potential loss of competitive advantage when making the decision, and given their successful track record, I am inclined to believe it's not going to be as bad as the article is portraying it. I'm sure they haven't - and are just reacting in the way that any C-suite American executive reacts to a union forming in their company - by making every attempt, sensible or senseless, to suppress it.
  - sn_master 6y ago
    They're the business owners and responsible for their business decisions. I don't think we have the decades of experience they have managing trillion-dollar organizations. This is the first time I am seeing that many people claiming they're upset because Amazon made a decision they think is bad for its own business.
- Spooky23 6y ago
  Senior Executives aren’t the Jedi council or whatever. Someone probably discovered somebody dumping the GAL and the big shots made an emotional decision.
  - sn_master 6y ago
    Any intern can still dump the GAL, they only removed access for warehouse workers, not for software engineers.

ipsocannibal 6y ago

The problem is lying about why a company is taking an action. A lie by omission is still a lie. How do you "Earn Trust" with your employees by taking this action and meeting their concerns with silence? If you think unions are going to be the death of your company then make your case and state when a change is intended to inhibit union organizing. Thats not whats happening according to the article. Is lying standard in all big organizations, and more importantly should it be?

ipsocannibal 6y ago
I guess lying is becoming more of a standard practice at Amazon, https://theintercept.com/2021/03/25/amazon-drivers-pee-bottles-union/ https://theintercept.com/2021/03/25/amazon-drivers-pee-bottl...