5 ms·

Anyone hiring ex-inmates in large numbers is doing society a great benefit, whether it’s altruism, PR, or both hardly matters to me. It’s not easy managing that

• vintermann 4y ago
  Altruism and PR aren't the only options. If the explanation is "they'll be less likely to dare to ask for better treatment" then I think that's a problem.
  • parineum 4y ago
    And that's everyone but Amazon's fault, in this case.
    • jtode 4y ago
      The people who contribute daily to making our society that way are all indeed culpable. However, the people who opportunistically turn a profit from society being that way are the worst of that collection of people.
      • stale2002 4y ago
        • deadbolt 4y ago
          Source on jtode wanting to "take away these people's jobs"?
          • stale2002 4y ago
            If the other person wants to say "Yes, I am totally glad that Amazon gave these people jobs, and Amazon is good for doing that, and I take back my statement where I attack amazon, for profiting, by giving people these jobs", then that would be great. But if they are unwilling to explicitly say that amazon giving these people these jobs is a good thing, then I think that says a lot. Specifically, they should say, it is a good thing for amazon to "opportunistically". give these people those jobs, instead of saying that this "opportunistic" behavior of giving people those jobs is bad.
            • jtode 4y ago
              If they're paying them less than living wages - specifically, if they are paying them less than anyone else doing the same job - it's opportunistic. If they are making a point of hiring ex-inmates and giving them all the same pay, benefits, etc, as anyone else, I take my statement back.
      • parineum 4y ago
        > opportunistically turn a profit Would you have felt the same way when companies started hiring former slaves, chinese, irish, italians, women, etc.? What you're identifying is a market advantage that companies can gain by being non-discriminatory. You've zeroed in on a major strength of free market economics. Bigotry costs companies money.
    • harry8 4y ago
      Amazon exploiting that for profit and to increase power against other employees is Amazon's moral decision and their responsibility. They will spin it every way for sure. But note that they didn't hire ex-cons when not doing so helped them in their power struggle against labor. It was a thing that only happened when unemployment level dropped to the point where labor had a little bit of bargaining power and not at all before. That's a fact that won't be explained in the spin. I'm sure the Washington post will be all over it in their reporting though.
      • edgyquant 4y ago
        Companies exist to make profit and are a market tool through which we reduce efficiencies. Society sets the conditions through which they operate via culture and perhaps more importantly regulations. Amazon didn’t incentivize the hiring of these employees society did (and the government through subsidies in a lot of states.) Amazon is making a rational corporate decision. It’s being painted as a great evil by pro-union activists who treat all the other employees as useful idiots and former inmates too ignorant or needy to have their own opinion. It’s disgusting.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
• deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
• boomboomsubban 4y ago
  The memo doesn't seem to suggest hiring the formerly incarcerated, it only mentions creating partnerships with organizations that work for the formerly incarcerated. It doesn't say what that partnership would entail, but something like donating to an outreach program for the formerly incarcerated doesn't deserve tax breaks.
  • bcrosby95 4y ago
    I think you missed this part: > “....By creating a pipeline of workers who would immediately benefit from our benefits compared to other peers in the region, we are creating spokespeople that can improve our reputation, while helping our communities most vulnerable.”
    • deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]