9 ms·

A bit surprised you sent the photos to Amazon. That person is likely to be fired. A bit of pee on the street is not going to harm anything or anyone (otherwise

by notJim 6y ago

A bit surprised you sent the photos to Amazon. That person is likely to be fired. A bit of pee on the street is not going to harm anything or anyone (otherwise the streets around bars would be an enormous biohazard), although it's obviously gross.

Judgmentality 6y ago
Is human pee any more gross than dog pee? This isn't a rhetorical question - I'm genuinely asking.
- lostlogin 6y ago
  I’m unsure, but cat pee is in a class of its own. That stuff is evil.
- neartheplain 6y ago
  Human pee transmits human diseases.
  - Taylor_OD 6y ago
    As does dog pee. Which covers every sidewalk and corner you've ever stepped on.
  - jfengel 6y ago
    It generally does not. Most human urine is fairly sterile. And even if you've got a bladder or kidney infection, it's the same bacteria that you have on your own skin already -- it infects the urinary tract when forced inside (most often by sex). Human feces, on the other hand, is quite dangerous. Generally you have to touch it or ingest it to get sick from it, but there are lots of ways for the bacteria to spread. So the urine isn't dangerous, but if people are urinating in public, there's a risk that they're also defecating in public. And that's more serious.
  - adolph 6y ago
    Human urine very rarely transmits human diseases, unlike feces. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urine
bredren 6y ago
Another option was sending it to media, which I presumed would have gotten attention. I thought the person had a better chance of holding on to the job if it was handled without publicity. I don't have a lab, so I can't determine if it was pee. And I can't imagine you'd get to hold on to a job at Target if you poured pee out in the parking lot in front of customers. Our friend with the USPS said "[at USPS] we’re allowed to travel as far as we need to find a restroom so no need to do it." If this is the case at Amazon, then there shouldn't be a need to pee in bottles. However, if this is not the case at Amazon, then what was apparently Bezos' tweet [1] was not reflective of the situation on the ground. I've written him directly before, and depending on the response, I may do it in this instance because he's not seeing what I'm seeing. [1] https://twitter.com/amazonnews/status/1374911222361956359 https://twitter.com/amazonnews/status/1374911222361956359
- chaps 6y ago
  Can you share the email you sent them? Almost certain you got them fired in a pandemic.
- Rule35 6y ago
  Amazon's drivers are contractors if anyone is pushing them to pee in bottles, it's themselves. So there's no actual answer to this issue. Are they not being paid enough, such that they can't pee, or are they making an reasonable decision to pee in a bottle in order to save 15 minutes and make more money. Considering they keep taking the contracts one has to assume that they're profitable, at least usually. > I can't imagine you'd get to hold on to a job at Target if you poured pee out in the parking lot in front of customers. No, nor should anyone want you to. Even beyond any hygiene and smell issues, it's bad PR and that's not what you're paid for. There's a rash of blaming companies for being reasonable. Including one of a CVS manager being threatened with doxxing for calling the police on a thief. This concern for the driver seems more like a larger narrative of pro-unionism. Most people in this thread are intentionally misrepresenting the issue, using the words 'job', and 'living wage'. These are contractors and if they don't make money today they can courier for another company tomorrow. If they don't it's because they voted with their wallets.
foobiekr 6y ago
So Amazon is blackmailing us with the delivery people as hostage? Well, that basically describes the gig economy across the board, I guess.
Rule35 6y ago
> That person is likely to be fired. Umm, yeah. They dumped a bottle of piss outside a customers house. That's bad advertising. Or, possibly, it's intended to be good union advertising. But either way, that person has got to go. So many dishonest people downvoting. Probably unionists. We know that this case hangs on the difference between contractors and employees, and that even if employees unionize the contractors will choose to keep peeing in bottles.
- eggsmediumrare 6y ago
  Or maybe that person and all his colleagues should have enough flexibility that they don't have to do this.
  - Rule35 6y ago
    This is driver flexibility. They choose the amount of deliveries they take. The drivers do this because they want more money. People generally courier as an in-between job, like construction laborer, and they appreciate the ability to earn more, quickly. As a laborer I used to put in 14h days with cleanup. But that kept me from losing income during a career switch so it was a choice I was happy to make.
- ziddoap 6y ago
  Finding your viewpoint disagreeable does not make one dishonest or a "unionist".
  - Rule35 6y ago
    But downvoting me because I'm not wrong, but "disagreeable" (read, correct) is dishonest. And no, causation seems to run the other way, apparently being a unionist makes you dishonest.
    - ziddoap 6y ago
      I didn't say your comment "wasn't wrong, but disagreeable", I said your viewpoint was simply disagreeable (read, not necessarily correct and people obviously disagree with what you have stated (read, they think your incorrect)).

by notJim 6y ago

Judgmentality 6y ago

Is human pee any more gross than dog pee? This isn't a rhetorical question - I'm genuinely asking.

lostlogin 6y ago
I’m unsure, but cat pee is in a class of its own. That stuff is evil.
neartheplain 6y ago
Human pee transmits human diseases.
- Taylor_OD 6y ago
  As does dog pee. Which covers every sidewalk and corner you've ever stepped on.
- jfengel 6y ago
  It generally does not. Most human urine is fairly sterile. And even if you've got a bladder or kidney infection, it's the same bacteria that you have on your own skin already -- it infects the urinary tract when forced inside (most often by sex). Human feces, on the other hand, is quite dangerous. Generally you have to touch it or ingest it to get sick from it, but there are lots of ways for the bacteria to spread. So the urine isn't dangerous, but if people are urinating in public, there's a risk that they're also defecating in public. And that's more serious.
- adolph 6y ago
  Human urine very rarely transmits human diseases, unlike feces. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urine

bredren 6y ago

Another option was sending it to media, which I presumed would have gotten attention. I thought the person had a better chance of holding on to the job if it was handled without publicity. I don't have a lab, so I can't determine if it was pee. And I can't imagine you'd get to hold on to a job at Target if you poured pee out in the parking lot in front of customers. Our friend with the USPS said "[at USPS] we’re allowed to travel as far as we need to find a restroom so no need to do it." If this is the case at Amazon, then there shouldn't be a need to pee in bottles. However, if this is not the case at Amazon, then what was apparently Bezos' tweet [1] was not reflective of the situation on the ground. I've written him directly before, and depending on the response, I may do it in this instance because he's not seeing what I'm seeing. [1] https://twitter.com/amazonnews/status/1374911222361956359 https://twitter.com/amazonnews/status/1374911222361956359

chaps 6y ago
Can you share the email you sent them? Almost certain you got them fired in a pandemic.
Rule35 6y ago
Amazon's drivers are contractors if anyone is pushing them to pee in bottles, it's themselves. So there's no actual answer to this issue. Are they not being paid enough, such that they can't pee, or are they making an reasonable decision to pee in a bottle in order to save 15 minutes and make more money. Considering they keep taking the contracts one has to assume that they're profitable, at least usually. > I can't imagine you'd get to hold on to a job at Target if you poured pee out in the parking lot in front of customers. No, nor should anyone want you to. Even beyond any hygiene and smell issues, it's bad PR and that's not what you're paid for. There's a rash of blaming companies for being reasonable. Including one of a CVS manager being threatened with doxxing for calling the police on a thief. This concern for the driver seems more like a larger narrative of pro-unionism. Most people in this thread are intentionally misrepresenting the issue, using the words 'job', and 'living wage'. These are contractors and if they don't make money today they can courier for another company tomorrow. If they don't it's because they voted with their wallets.

foobiekr 6y ago

So Amazon is blackmailing us with the delivery people as hostage? Well, that basically describes the gig economy across the board, I guess.

Rule35 6y ago

> That person is likely to be fired. Umm, yeah. They dumped a bottle of piss outside a customers house. That's bad advertising. Or, possibly, it's intended to be good union advertising. But either way, that person has got to go. So many dishonest people downvoting. Probably unionists. We know that this case hangs on the difference between contractors and employees, and that even if employees unionize the contractors will choose to keep peeing in bottles.

eggsmediumrare 6y ago
Or maybe that person and all his colleagues should have enough flexibility that they don't have to do this.
- Rule35 6y ago
  This is driver flexibility. They choose the amount of deliveries they take. The drivers do this because they want more money. People generally courier as an in-between job, like construction laborer, and they appreciate the ability to earn more, quickly. As a laborer I used to put in 14h days with cleanup. But that kept me from losing income during a career switch so it was a choice I was happy to make.
ziddoap 6y ago
Finding your viewpoint disagreeable does not make one dishonest or a "unionist".
- Rule35 6y ago
  But downvoting me because I'm not wrong, but "disagreeable" (read, correct) is dishonest. And no, causation seems to run the other way, apparently being a unionist makes you dishonest.
  - ziddoap 6y ago
    I didn't say your comment "wasn't wrong, but disagreeable", I said your viewpoint was simply disagreeable (read, not necessarily correct and people obviously disagree with what you have stated (read, they think your incorrect)).