3 ms·
Uhh, that's kind of my point exactly. If a husband is beating his wife, expecting him pay for her to have an attorney is such a weird expectation to have. If I
by legitster 3y ago
Uhh, that's kind of my point exactly. If a husband is beating his wife, expecting him pay for her to have an attorney is such a weird expectation to have. If I am a loving husband, I can just stop beating my wife.
If Amazon can improve their working conditions, either willfully or through the enforcement of labor laws, whether or not they are anti-labor is kind of irrelevant.
- skyyler 3y agoIn your analogy, the husband has a fiduciary responsibility to keep beating his wife. It's kind of a bad analogy. If the situation was that the husband was obligated to beat his wife, forcing him to pay for a referee to control how hard he beat his wife would be a good thing. Obviously it would be better if he just stopped beating his wife, but the guys in suits upstairs would be pretty upset about that... So let's limit the beatings in the meantime
- legitster 3y agoI don't follow. Corporations have a fiduciary duty to be terrible to employees?
- Draiken 3y agoNot directly, only by proxy. Profit is king. At Amazon scales, you weigh in how much money you'll save by breaking laws and eventually getting a slap on the wrist fine versus all other alternatives. Unsurprisingly it's often much cheaper to be terrible to your employees and replace them endlessly, than it is to not be terrible. Especially once you make unionization nigh impossible.
- skyyler 3y agoYep. You understand it.
- PawgerZ 3y agoIf thats where the uncaptured profit is, then yes.
- Draiken 3y agoIDK man, irrelevant for who? It's definitely relevant to me. I would never work at Amazon because of these practices, even if they probably don't extend to developers (at least at the same scale). Maybe it's not relevant for you but I'm sure it's relevant for many others too.