3 ms·
> The workers in question voluntarily opt-in to Amazon employment. Voluntary with a threat of hunger, homelessness, healthcare loss, etc if not. This isn't ob
by aaomidi 6y ago
> The workers in question voluntarily opt-in to Amazon employment.
Voluntary with a threat of hunger, homelessness, healthcare loss, etc if not.
This isn't obviously just a problem with Amazon, but employment across low-paying jobs isn't voluntary. They're all shit (some more than others). This is an overarching problem with employment in general.
- sneak 6y ago> Voluntary with a threat of hunger, homelessness, healthcare loss, etc if not. No, the threat is that they'd have to work somewhere other than Amazon, same as everyone else. Most people in our society work non-Amazon jobs, it's not that bad a "punishment" for taking a bathroom break. It's also not a "threat": a job today is no obligation to a job tomorrow. Things change.
- AstralStorm 6y agoThe threat is that they won't be able to make ends meet if so much as a month without a job happens to them. That's because the job does not pay anything near enough. Existential threat. And job is time and energy consuming enough to make it high impossible to look for something else, much less anything else that isn't similarly exploitative. It is a systemic problem and Amazon is one of the big parts of that system. "Just find another job" ignores the reality of situation of people actually taking this terrible job.
- aaomidi 6y agoAbsolutely. And the point of a government is to protect people from predatory contracts and agreements that individuals really can't refuse.