25 ms·

Do you really believe that they are trying to instill camaraderie and mutual respect among their white collar and abused contractor workers, or are they more li

by vgeek 5y ago

Do you really believe that they are trying to instill camaraderie and mutual respect among their white collar and abused contractor workers, or are they more likely to be have a shortage of delivery contractors and are looking to implement this as a some sort of stopgap or PR piece? I have worked places where myself and fellow office workers have regularly pitched in for things like inventory in the warehouse, but then again the companies I have worked at have not been notoriously abusive with regards to labor and compensation. Coming from a blue collar family and having worked crap jobs prior to college, I never look down on any labor, rather the companies who take advantage. I do look at exploitative companies implementing suspect policies with a cynical perspective. If you don't believe that the gig economy is a shift towards destroying worker's rights and solidarity (how many tech workers are really pro labor? Vs how many anti-union rugged individualists), I'm sorry.

mdoms 5y ago
You think that the most likely explanation is that they like to pay people $200k salaries to deliver food? > If you don't believe that the gig economy is a shift towards destroying worker's rights and solidarity (how many tech workers are really pro labor? Vs how many anti-union rugged individualists), I'm sorry. I absolutely do believe that and I outright refuse to participate in the gig economy. I never use Uber, I never have food delivered, I do not like this. But we're talking about salaried employees being asked to put themselves in the shoes of their users once a month. Let's keep some perspective.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > You think that the most likely explanation is that they like to pay people $200k salaries to deliver food? I think the most likely explanation is some executive who himself lacks sympathy with the vast majority of the classes of people working underneath him read something or had some isolated experience, or both, relating to the utility of the technique, overgeneralized it, and the instituted an overgeneralized, poorly considered, mandate around a broadly-useful concept, rather than initiating an effort to find a way to incorporate it as and where appropriate.
- vgeek 5y ago
  Exactly this. The majority of their employees aren't SWEs, they are probably comissioned sales reps or customer support staff. The expensive employees will probably be exempted after a few months, if that. This seems of a ploy to garner PR to recruit drivers (like the "Undercover Boss" pandering that people apparently like, "look, even our senior management does this task", Disney managers in the Goofy suit) than anything. It tries to counter the newfound realization that it is a crappy job with by forcing other employees to comisserate (not really, since the FTEs are paid better, have insurance, benefits, guaranteed work, etc.) via performing the same duties-- while not providing tangible benefits to the contractors. Sure, one can argue that it can help PMs or POs in better understanding the concerns of the drivers, but wouldn't drivers likely prefer to keep their tips, health insurance or livable wages versus a 12% improvement in order dispatch time?
- bluefirebrand 5y ago
  > But we're talking about salaried employees being asked to put themselves in the shoes of their users once a month. Let's keep some perspective My perspective is "I did that job in college and I remember well how shit it is, I don't need to be told by my boss to go experience it again"
DarylZero 5y ago
> Do you really believe that they are trying to instill camaraderie and mutual respect among their white collar and abused contractor workers I think they're trying to create a corporate cult where everyone believes in the mission and that the delivery workers are happy and being given great gifts of opportunity by the corporate giver rather than being exploited. They don't want empathy for the actual situation of the (delivery) workers -- which would require empathizing with the precarity of their whole existence. They want a ritualized simulacrum of empathy. They want to pretend that they have empathy, exactly to negate the possibility actual empathy, and to negate actual worker revolt. It's the exact opposite of what it presents itself as.

by vgeek 5y ago

mdoms 5y ago

You think that the most likely explanation is that they like to pay people $200k salaries to deliver food? > If you don't believe that the gig economy is a shift towards destroying worker's rights and solidarity (how many tech workers are really pro labor? Vs how many anti-union rugged individualists), I'm sorry. I absolutely do believe that and I outright refuse to participate in the gig economy. I never use Uber, I never have food delivered, I do not like this. But we're talking about salaried employees being asked to put themselves in the shoes of their users once a month. Let's keep some perspective.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> You think that the most likely explanation is that they like to pay people $200k salaries to deliver food? I think the most likely explanation is some executive who himself lacks sympathy with the vast majority of the classes of people working underneath him read something or had some isolated experience, or both, relating to the utility of the technique, overgeneralized it, and the instituted an overgeneralized, poorly considered, mandate around a broadly-useful concept, rather than initiating an effort to find a way to incorporate it as and where appropriate.
vgeek 5y ago
Exactly this. The majority of their employees aren't SWEs, they are probably comissioned sales reps or customer support staff. The expensive employees will probably be exempted after a few months, if that. This seems of a ploy to garner PR to recruit drivers (like the "Undercover Boss" pandering that people apparently like, "look, even our senior management does this task", Disney managers in the Goofy suit) than anything. It tries to counter the newfound realization that it is a crappy job with by forcing other employees to comisserate (not really, since the FTEs are paid better, have insurance, benefits, guaranteed work, etc.) via performing the same duties-- while not providing tangible benefits to the contractors. Sure, one can argue that it can help PMs or POs in better understanding the concerns of the drivers, but wouldn't drivers likely prefer to keep their tips, health insurance or livable wages versus a 12% improvement in order dispatch time?
bluefirebrand 5y ago
> But we're talking about salaried employees being asked to put themselves in the shoes of their users once a month. Let's keep some perspective My perspective is "I did that job in college and I remember well how shit it is, I don't need to be told by my boss to go experience it again"

DarylZero 5y ago

> Do you really believe that they are trying to instill camaraderie and mutual respect among their white collar and abused contractor workers I think they're trying to create a corporate cult where everyone believes in the mission and that the delivery workers are happy and being given great gifts of opportunity by the corporate giver rather than being exploited. They don't want empathy for the actual situation of the (delivery) workers -- which would require empathizing with the precarity of their whole existence. They want a ritualized simulacrum of empathy. They want to pretend that they have empathy, exactly to negate the possibility actual empathy, and to negate actual worker revolt. It's the exact opposite of what it presents itself as.