7 ms·

They baited Warren by lying about the fact that Amazon warehouse / delivery employees have to urinate in bottles to meet deadlines? The tweets from their accou

by Jonnax 6y ago

They baited Warren by lying about the fact that Amazon warehouse / delivery employees have to urinate in bottles to meet deadlines? The tweets from their account caused significant negative press for Amazon on news and social media across the world. Amazon is a global company, this kind of disdain for employees isn't looked upon as favourably in other countries. It's bad for business. Especially from an official PR channel.

JBSmoove 6y ago
I don't care who was "baited" A US Senator threatening to retaliate and break-up a business because she didn't like tweets about her is straight-up authoritarian thuggery. It's the same shit Trump used to do but when Liz does it...well it's GREAT, she's "fighting for the working class"
- Jonnax 6y ago
  So it's okay for a business to treat employees so badly they find they have to piss in bottles? And it's okay for their official PR twitter account to lie and say it doesn't happen? But it's not okay that a politician says they're going to do something about it?
  - jbroson 6y ago
    Amazon's actions have absolutely nothing to do with this. US Senators should not be threatening retaliation against a company because of tweets that piss them off. Why is this only bad when Trump or a Republican does it?
    - Jonnax 6y ago
      Why can't US Senators do that? I presume the people that voted for Warren are on her side in this argument so she's being an advocate for their views. Just because you think Amazon's employees being forced to piss in bottles isn't bad to you doesn't mean that others sees it as an injustice that makes people angry. >Why is this only bad when Trump or a Republican does it? Maybe treat each event on a case by case basis rather than a blanket rule?
  - dahfizz 6y ago
    I would expect more nuance from an HN reader. It's possible for both amazon and warren to be in the wrong.
    - ScoobleDoodle 6y ago
      But in this case the Amazon Twitter account is in the wrong while Warren is in the right. Amazon Twitter straight up lied. Warren is actively doing the job she was elected to do of motivating change to make laws and rules that will change the underlying foundation of the business landscape in ways that she and those who voted for her perceive as positive.
    - Jonnax 6y ago
      I don't see where Warren is wrong here. Care to explain it? Because it seems like the point of view advocated is "Politicans should not express views I don't like on social media"
      - dahfizz 6y ago
        If Warren tweeted that she was going to break up amazon because they were harming consumers and mistreating workers, etc, that would be one thing. Instead, she is going after amazon as a personal vendetta because she feels 'heckled'. She is explicitly attacking first amendment rights. It's a textbook case of corruption / abuse of power.
        Jonnax 6y ago
        Are you actually serious? She's been going after amazon for years. Like breaking up big tech companies is pretty much the only thing you hear about her in passing. A personal vendetta against their twitter account just didn't start now. Also this is corruption / abuse of power to you? You might want to get a new textbook.
      - 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
        Instead of “Politicans should not express views I don't like on social media” how about “Politicans should not express the view that ‘people shouldn’t be powerful enough to be snotty to/heckle me’ on any platform.” It’s the “so you’re not powerful enough to heckle senators with snotty tweets” part that’s bad. Regardless of how you feel about her campaign to break up big tech, this is an appalling thing for a government official to say. I hate Twitter and Twitter culture as much as anyone, but “you shouldn’t be powerful enough to be snotty to a senator” is dystopian in my book.
  - concordDance 6y ago
    Politicians should not be threatening to silence people or companies, regardless of whether the latter are lying or treating people badly. If Amazon is breaking employment law or anti-monopoly law or anything else it can be fined or broken up. What it should not be is silenced.
    - wizzwizz4 6y ago
      The problem is not that Amazon is criticising politicians. The problem is that Amazon doesn't need to care; it'll get loads of money anyway. I need to care about what I say, because if I upset people, they'll stop interacting with me. If Amazon started running adverts about a giant space monkey that wanted to eat the moon, what would happen?
    - Jonnax 6y ago
      https://www.businessinsider.com/elizabeth-warren-amazon-twitter-taxes-unionization-alabama-union-bezos-2021-3?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/elizabeth-warren-amazon-twit... I've quote the tweets below. Warren has been campaigning to break up large tech companies. What is so unprofessional about that? Clearly if she was to try and get them fined or broken up it would be through these laws. She isn't silencing them. She's saying that there'll be consequences. And Amazon's PR isn't a small company. They can take the heat. I don't agree with you. A company that forces employees to piss in bottles and lies about it should have their lies face consequences. Warren isn't removing their tweets. How are they being silenced? Here is the quotes: ``` After she posted the video on Twitter, saying that companies like Amazon "pay close to nothing in taxes," the tech giant quickly fired back. "You make the tax laws @SenWarren; we just follow them," it tweeted from its official news account. "If you don't like the laws you've created, by all means, change them," it added. Amazon said that it had paid "billions of dollars" in corporate taxes over the past few years alone. Warren hit back, saying: "I didn't write the loopholes you exploit, @amazon – your armies of lawyers and lobbyists did. "But you bet I'll fight to make you pay your fair share," she added. "And fight your union-busting. And fight to break up Big Tech so you're not powerful enough to heckle senators with snotty tweets." ```
      - 6y ago
SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
Amazon doesn’t come out of this looking good either, but it’s pretty bad for a Senator to go around telling people that she’ll break up your company if you “heckle” her with “snotty tweets”.
2-tpg 6y ago
> the fact that Amazon warehouse / delivery employees have to urinate in bottles to meet deadlines? Amazon does not want its employees to piss into bottles. But sometimes employees (predominantly male I hope) do piss into bottles, because they did not plan correctly, or just had to go while on the road. If caught, these employees (and their managers) are then reprimanded. If they get a chance to defend themselves, of course they claim it was due to the deadline, not poor planning or bladder control or uncommon hygiene ethics. Amazon factually states: Hey, if we required our employees to pee into bottles to meet deadlines, do you seriously think people would work for us, and not 100s of other low-paid jobs which don't have that medieval requirement? Politicians: Hey, this you?! I have lots of pictures of bottles with piss! Where is your snotty reply now? You say that your employees do not have to piss into bottles, so how come I have those pictures?! Huh?! It is embarrassing to both sides. Especially for official government employees (who also don't have to pee into bottles to meet deadlines, but I am sure you can turn up at least some pictures: if not, find any traces of cocaine use in the Capitol, then posit that the US congress have their senators use cocaine in the toilet to meet deadlines. Or, you know, bi-partisan plan to have low-skilled employees share in the American dream made possible by Amazon, but I guess that does not fit inside a tweet).
- riversflow 6y ago
  The warehouse/delivery worker abuse at amazon runs deep, and it goes far beyond employees peeing in bottles. Checkout the Frontline documentary, Amazon Empire: The Rise and Reign of Jeff Bezos [1] [1] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/amazon-empire/ https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/amazon-empire/
  - 2-tpg 6y ago
    > it goes far beyond employees peeing in bottles. No, but solid rhetorics. This is the part you give proof of the fact that Amazon have their workers pee in bottles to meet deadlines. Not point to something else entirely that goes far beyond the things you pose as facts, which are not. Don't look at that! Look at this documentary that goes far far beyond it. Well played! And solid one for PBS for exposing the worker abuse that Amazon is now in court for! We need the free press to save worker laws.

by Jonnax 6y ago

JBSmoove 6y ago

I don't care who was "baited" A US Senator threatening to retaliate and break-up a business because she didn't like tweets about her is straight-up authoritarian thuggery. It's the same shit Trump used to do but when Liz does it...well it's GREAT, she's "fighting for the working class"

Jonnax 6y ago
So it's okay for a business to treat employees so badly they find they have to piss in bottles? And it's okay for their official PR twitter account to lie and say it doesn't happen? But it's not okay that a politician says they're going to do something about it?
- jbroson 6y ago
  Amazon's actions have absolutely nothing to do with this. US Senators should not be threatening retaliation against a company because of tweets that piss them off. Why is this only bad when Trump or a Republican does it?
  - Jonnax 6y ago
    Why can't US Senators do that? I presume the people that voted for Warren are on her side in this argument so she's being an advocate for their views. Just because you think Amazon's employees being forced to piss in bottles isn't bad to you doesn't mean that others sees it as an injustice that makes people angry. >Why is this only bad when Trump or a Republican does it? Maybe treat each event on a case by case basis rather than a blanket rule?
- dahfizz 6y ago
  I would expect more nuance from an HN reader. It's possible for both amazon and warren to be in the wrong.
  - ScoobleDoodle 6y ago
    But in this case the Amazon Twitter account is in the wrong while Warren is in the right. Amazon Twitter straight up lied. Warren is actively doing the job she was elected to do of motivating change to make laws and rules that will change the underlying foundation of the business landscape in ways that she and those who voted for her perceive as positive.
  - Jonnax 6y ago
    I don't see where Warren is wrong here. Care to explain it? Because it seems like the point of view advocated is "Politicans should not express views I don't like on social media"
    - dahfizz 6y ago
      If Warren tweeted that she was going to break up amazon because they were harming consumers and mistreating workers, etc, that would be one thing. Instead, she is going after amazon as a personal vendetta because she feels 'heckled'. She is explicitly attacking first amendment rights. It's a textbook case of corruption / abuse of power.
      - Jonnax 6y ago
        Are you actually serious? She's been going after amazon for years. Like breaking up big tech companies is pretty much the only thing you hear about her in passing. A personal vendetta against their twitter account just didn't start now. Also this is corruption / abuse of power to you? You might want to get a new textbook.
    - 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y ago
      Instead of “Politicans should not express views I don't like on social media” how about “Politicans should not express the view that ‘people shouldn’t be powerful enough to be snotty to/heckle me’ on any platform.” It’s the “so you’re not powerful enough to heckle senators with snotty tweets” part that’s bad. Regardless of how you feel about her campaign to break up big tech, this is an appalling thing for a government official to say. I hate Twitter and Twitter culture as much as anyone, but “you shouldn’t be powerful enough to be snotty to a senator” is dystopian in my book.
- concordDance 6y ago
  Politicians should not be threatening to silence people or companies, regardless of whether the latter are lying or treating people badly. If Amazon is breaking employment law or anti-monopoly law or anything else it can be fined or broken up. What it should not be is silenced.
  - wizzwizz4 6y ago
    The problem is not that Amazon is criticising politicians. The problem is that Amazon doesn't need to care; it'll get loads of money anyway. I need to care about what I say, because if I upset people, they'll stop interacting with me. If Amazon started running adverts about a giant space monkey that wanted to eat the moon, what would happen?
  - Jonnax 6y ago
    https://www.businessinsider.com/elizabeth-warren-amazon-twitter-taxes-unionization-alabama-union-bezos-2021-3?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/elizabeth-warren-amazon-twit... I've quote the tweets below. Warren has been campaigning to break up large tech companies. What is so unprofessional about that? Clearly if she was to try and get them fined or broken up it would be through these laws. She isn't silencing them. She's saying that there'll be consequences. And Amazon's PR isn't a small company. They can take the heat. I don't agree with you. A company that forces employees to piss in bottles and lies about it should have their lies face consequences. Warren isn't removing their tweets. How are they being silenced? Here is the quotes: ``` After she posted the video on Twitter, saying that companies like Amazon "pay close to nothing in taxes," the tech giant quickly fired back. "You make the tax laws @SenWarren; we just follow them," it tweeted from its official news account. "If you don't like the laws you've created, by all means, change them," it added. Amazon said that it had paid "billions of dollars" in corporate taxes over the past few years alone. Warren hit back, saying: "I didn't write the loopholes you exploit, @amazon – your armies of lawyers and lobbyists did. "But you bet I'll fight to make you pay your fair share," she added. "And fight your union-busting. And fight to break up Big Tech so you're not powerful enough to heckle senators with snotty tweets." ```
    - 6y ago

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago

Amazon doesn’t come out of this looking good either, but it’s pretty bad for a Senator to go around telling people that she’ll break up your company if you “heckle” her with “snotty tweets”.

2-tpg 6y ago

> the fact that Amazon warehouse / delivery employees have to urinate in bottles to meet deadlines? Amazon does not want its employees to piss into bottles. But sometimes employees (predominantly male I hope) do piss into bottles, because they did not plan correctly, or just had to go while on the road. If caught, these employees (and their managers) are then reprimanded. If they get a chance to defend themselves, of course they claim it was due to the deadline, not poor planning or bladder control or uncommon hygiene ethics. Amazon factually states: Hey, if we required our employees to pee into bottles to meet deadlines, do you seriously think people would work for us, and not 100s of other low-paid jobs which don't have that medieval requirement? Politicians: Hey, this you?! I have lots of pictures of bottles with piss! Where is your snotty reply now? You say that your employees do not have to piss into bottles, so how come I have those pictures?! Huh?! It is embarrassing to both sides. Especially for official government employees (who also don't have to pee into bottles to meet deadlines, but I am sure you can turn up at least some pictures: if not, find any traces of cocaine use in the Capitol, then posit that the US congress have their senators use cocaine in the toilet to meet deadlines. Or, you know, bi-partisan plan to have low-skilled employees share in the American dream made possible by Amazon, but I guess that does not fit inside a tweet).

riversflow 6y ago
The warehouse/delivery worker abuse at amazon runs deep, and it goes far beyond employees peeing in bottles. Checkout the Frontline documentary, Amazon Empire: The Rise and Reign of Jeff Bezos [1] [1] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/amazon-empire/ https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/amazon-empire/
- 2-tpg 6y ago
  > it goes far beyond employees peeing in bottles. No, but solid rhetorics. This is the part you give proof of the fact that Amazon have their workers pee in bottles to meet deadlines. Not point to something else entirely that goes far beyond the things you pose as facts, which are not. Don't look at that! Look at this documentary that goes far far beyond it. Well played! And solid one for PBS for exposing the worker abuse that Amazon is now in court for! We need the free press to save worker laws.