15 ms·
I Was Illegally Fired by Amazon for Speaking Out About a Coworker's Death (2023)
- Vaslo 3y ago[flagged]
- mrborp 3y ago[flagged]
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoA court ruled in their favor... If anyone wonders why I have a poor view of the HN community as a whole, this is exhibit-fucking-A.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- causality0 3y agoEven true claims need independent verification.
- jacquesm 3y agoAnd you think the court wasn't independent enough?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Vaslo 3y ago[flagged]
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoThat poster wasn't responding to you, but I'll take this on. The court case changes things. You accuse the interviewer of being biased, not understanding that you yourself are so biased you've ignored a crucial piece of evidence, that an independent court agreed that it was wrongful termination.
- Vaslo 3y agoAn independent court ruled that abortion choices should be moved to the states. Surely since this is an independent court as well, you agree right?
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agooh snap, whataboutism!
- nuclearnice3 3y agoRight. Poster doesn't dispute any of the claims, just pours FUD on. As an example, the piece is clearly identified as an "interview." Presented as a dialogue between CASPAR SHALLER and MAGDA MALINOWSKA. Poster lodges this comlaint: "I knew something was up when the author asked the subject"
- Vaslo 3y ago[flagged]
- nuclearnice3 3y agoPeople like you? Like the original post, you aren't dealing with the substance, you're just slinging insults. You are violating the first guideline. Which I reproduce here and offer you an opportunity to apologize to me: "Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes."
- Vaslo 3y ago[flagged]
- nuclearnice3 3y agoPlease don't cross into personal attack, regardless of how provocative someone is being or you feel they are. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoWhat does it mean to be an expert on deaths in Amazon Warehouses? She was a Union Organizer. Presumably, unions are most interested in working conditions and pay. She spoke out about the working conditions that she feels caused the death. This seems inline with what a union organizer would do, but more importantly, who the hell do you think is going to be more authoritative on this than a union organizer? What credentials do you feel she is lacking and who has the credentials such that you would be willing to defer to them as an expert?
- stavros 3y agoWhile I disagree with the GP's sentiment, a court ruling in her favor just means that the court agrees that she was unreasonably terminated, not that the things she said happened (please correct me if I'm wrong).
- zer8k 3y agoSpeculating on the journalistic quality of a far-left magazine on HN: Taboo Speculating on the journalistic quality of a far-right magazine on HN: "due diligence". It's important to understand the standpoint of the magazine. If they're far-anything chances are most of the reporting is garbage. So what they ruled in their favor? It doesn't mean the journalistic integrity is worth actually wasting clock cycles heating your CPU.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoA court ruled in her favor. It stopped being speculation at that point. And while you may argue the court got it wrong, you have the burden of proof there. - courts generally require due diligence - There's no way in hell Amazon didn't try to out-money her in terms of lawyers and they still lost - winning a wrongful termination case isn't typically easy.
- Vaslo 3y ago[flagged]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- wtfwhateven 3y agowhy is the court ruling "nonsense"? because you don't agree with it, or? seems biased to me
- Vaslo 3y ago[flagged]
- wtfwhateven 3y agoso you're sincerely asserting the court case doesn't exist?
- Vaslo 3y agoI didn't think about that but now that you say that, I'm not finding any other sources reporting on it. Again, when I read a heavily biased source, I'm always suspicious of the findings. When the author asks a virtual nobody at the company (and to be clear I am a virtual nobody at mine as are 98% of HN'ers) if there are deaths happening all the time at Amazon warehouses, this is a huge red flag. Why not check into this yourself? If she had said "yes all the time" he would have ran with that as if fact. I wish she had explicitly said it so Amazon could have sued the magazine out of existence.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agolisten to what you just said. It's not a problem if a single death happens, only if lots of deaths happen. The woman spoke out about a single death because her values are obviously different from yours.
- ToucanLoucan 3y agoWhy should we distrust the source of the claims when the opposing entity, amazon, already has a well documented and long history of pulling shit exactly like this and who’s been caught lying about it multiple times? I’m not even saying the worker/organizer is completely beyond reproach, but the only other entity with anything to offer is amazon themselves whom have already obliterated anything resembling credibility on this topic. Amazon corporate could tell me the sky is blue above a union organizers head and I would want it verified.
- wtfwhateven 3y agowell because big corporations are our best friends, can do no wrong, and anything that criticises them is "biased" or has an agenda, of course. why be a reasonable human being when you can instead irrationally defend Amazon Inc doing the indefensible for absolutely no reason, repeatedly backstabbing your fellow worker in the process to "own the libs" in the process?
- hef19898 3y agoWithout reading the article, I agree with you regarding journalists doing some research and adding facts to their articles, like number of warwhouse death at Amazon and elsewhere or the fact that a court already ruled in favor of the fired employee. That being said, the union organizer bit and "far left" magazine bit were uncalled for. If anything, being a union organozer would be further reason for Amazon firing them, and doesn't mean at all thwir accoubts are less believable.
- elmoos110 3y ago[flagged]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mattmcknight 3y agomisleading headline. "They fired me for allegedly taking pictures or videos — but they didn’t know, because no one saw it — when the body of Dariusz, a colleague of mine who had died during his shift, was moved to the hearse, which they considered inconsistent with their values and social standards."
- Cerium 3y agoI interpreted that to be the legal excuse given for an illegal firing, of which Amazon could not substantiate.
- ismokedoinks 3y agoYeah it seems pretty obvious that they wouldn't go on the record to say it was a retaliatory firing
- cwillu 3y ago“Finally, the judge stated that my dismissal could have been caused by my activity. What I was accused of in terminating the contract was not proven during the case. Amazon didn’t manage to provide any evidence to support their position.” “That is actually what the judge said: that there is a conflict between labor and employer, but the conflict cannot be an argument to dismiss union members.”
- mattmcknight 3y agoSo, they failed to prove she was the one that took the pictures. It's a presumption to directly state she was fired for speaking out.
- justinzollars 3y ago[flagged]
- helsinkiandrew 3y ago> but they didn’t know, because no one saw it The English is a little confusing - "they fired me for allegedly taking pictures or videos — but they didn’t know, because no one saw it" implies she admits she did take pictures/videos of the dead colleague but Amazon couldn't have known. If she had had taken photos and shared them with police to prove an accident or bad working practices fair enough, but otherwise I think I would have sacked her too if there was even anecdotal evidence that she had taken photos.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- mgaunard 3y agoIf you don't like the job and/or the working conditions, isn't the simplest thing to just quit?
- robin_reala 3y agoWhy should you quit when you can organise better working conditions?
- mgaunard 3y agoBecause that takes years, tons of effort and uncertainty, for a mediocre outcome at best?
- User23 3y agoThat and you’ll just be replaced by more amenable immigrant labor. People that are willing to travel around the world potentially risking their lives are going to take that $15 an hour warehouse job in a heartbeat. And it will be a considerably better deal than they’d get back home.
- Geisterde 3y agoThat sounds like an issue with immigration policy, you could stop this at amazon but it will do nothing for everyone else. Ill also point out that amazon only hires legal labor.
- User23 3y agoPersons who claim asylum can file for a legal work permit 150 days after filing for asylum until their case is adjudicated. Given the backlogs that currently means for years. And of course any children they have in that time are citizens. There are NGOs that help immigrants learn of these rights and exercise them. Amazon themselves even have a program to do so[1]. [1] https://press.aboutamazon.com/2022/3/amazon-launches-employment-support-program-for-refugees https://press.aboutamazon.com/2022/3/amazon-launches-employm...
- berz01 3y agoStop working for tech companies that don't give a shit about you. You want a business that cares about you... start one.
- toomuchtodo 3y agoNah, unionize and report to regulators as much as possible. Can't succeed in the worker version of the Kobayashi Maru by "starting your own Amazon." Seek leverage and engage it to maximum force. Companies will never give a shit about you, put them in a box like you would a shark. Don't play by existing broken rules, you will just suffer.
- duriendiuuuh 3y agoWhy don’t we fix the union we already have - our government? My biggest gripe with unions is they’re the political version of “let’s make a new standard”. Yeah it works - for a time - but ultimately just adds complexity to temporarily address a symptom of the problem.
- toomuchtodo 3y agoRepresentatives are a function of the electorate. If you want better representation, not only must people run, but the electorate must turn over (old ideas and their voters dying out, new voters and their ideas aging in). 1.8M voters over the age of 55 die every year, 4 million voters turn 18. Worker rights support increases as cohort age declines (and skews progressive, naturally). Certainly, a long term fix that will take decades. Near term, gotta organize, which can be done today. And workers need help today.
- wffurr 3y ago>> Representatives are a function of the electorate. Not in America. The essentials of our representative republic make it not especially representative. It's badly in need of reform to make the legislature actually representative: much larger house of representatives, 3-5 member districts, ranked choice voting, 18 year terms for supreme court justices, etc. etc.
- TomK32 3y agoDidn't log into my amazon account for year but just checked: First order in 1999 and last order in 2016. I can keep off it for many more years.
- graphe 3y agoDid you stop using AWS? Amazon's retail costs them money, AWS nets them profit. If you think about it, buying from Amazon is kinda like stealing from them.
- waveBidder 3y agoRetail only costs money because it's actively expanding. Or at least, that was true in like 2018 when I last read about it.
- f1shy 3y agoDo you have a source for that? Is that all around the world, or just in some countries? That really interest me.
- graphe 3y agoMany, heres one. https://fourweekmba.com/is-amazon-profitable-without-aws/ https://fourweekmba.com/is-amazon-profitable-without-aws/
- Hackbraten 3y agoThat's just the 2022 numbers, and not necessarily a good indicator for their overall performance?
- malfist 3y agoWhy do people keep repeating that retail costs amazon money. Look at our earning reports, that is clearly not the case. Over half of amazon's profit comes from retail revenue. Internally, a lot of amazon retail revenue turns into AWS profit as amazon retail is AWS's biggest customer.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- oatmeal1 3y ago[flagged]
- supriyo-biswas 3y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > Please don't complain that a submission is inappropriate. If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it. [...] If you flag, please don't also comment that you did.
- IshKebab 3y agoSounds like modern day slavery. I assume they must just pay pretty well for completely unskilled labour compared to the competition, otherwise why would people put up with those conditions?
- jacquesm 3y agoThey don't have to pay well, people working that kind of job don't have a whole lot of options. One leaves 10 more want to take their place. Employers are having a very easy time of it.
- techdmn 3y agoAt least partially because the Federal Reserve targets an unemployment rate high enough to keep some percentage of people desperate.
- Geisterde 3y agoThe true cause of societies ills, central banking.
- andsoitis 3y agowhat is your alternative proposal and what problems would it solve better?
- polarix 3y ago(presumably Geis’s comment was sarcasm?)
- jacquesm 3y agoNot really.
- Geisterde 3y agoA return to the gold standard would solve quite a bit. The ability to manipulate the money supply is too much power for any person or organization or government for that matter. This is the lifeblood of the economy, it is 50% of every transaction, of course when that gets corrupted everything goes with it.
- Geisterde 3y agoI know many old people at amazon who apparently decided they never needed to try in life. They found a role they were comfortable enough in, their joints creak going up stairs, they cant fit into tight spaces, and they refuse to take on any level of responsibility or ownership of anything. If you dont like the work, quit, but ill tell you right now that these people only pretend to care about themselves. As the youngest person on my team, I work every day to give my people every kind of assistance, resources, and encouragment that they could need to succeed past the more physical role they work now. I can only spoonfeed them though, I cant make them swallow a promotion. Some people dont want to live into old age, thats all I can call it. As to the interviewee, did you take pictures? Because you dont deny it, and you know that you are jepordizing the livelihoods of over a million of my coworkers in doing so.
- solarpunk 3y agoI'm having such a difficult time parsing this comment. What do you mean to say with those first two paragraphs?
- karaterobot 3y agoI read it as: commenter works in a physical job with older colleagues who, despite getting older and struggling more, are not attempting to get promoted or moved into a role they can continue to do as they age.
- Geisterde 3y agoAccurate. And they will tell you that themselves.
- card_zero 3y agoWhat about the third paragraph? I can see how taking photos of a corpse might save lives, since it implies the death was suspicious, and might be part of whistleblowing about some sort of violation of regulations, or negligence. But how can it jeopardize the livelihood of millions? Is the idea that their jobs might all have to vanish if a whistleblower reveals them to be fundamentally dangerous?
- theusus 3y agoRetaliation is all too common in corporate even if people recognize it or not.
- amelius 3y ago"Corporations don't have emotions and only act in the interest of profit."
- passwordoops 3y agoAnd somehow this makes them legal persons in the eyes of US law
- bornfreddy 3y agoLegal persons that can't go to prison if they commit crimes.
- cscurmudgeon 3y agoDidn't this happen in the EU which is 5000 years ahead of the planet?
- saltybytes 3y agoThis is cruel and heartbraking. Didn't expect this to happen in any European countries the least in Poland where they have strong unions. Retaliation is pretty common in the US - I announced to HR that my wife is expecting (Tue) and was fired on Friday.
- faeyanpiraat 3y agoWhy did you announce it?
- tw04 3y agoPresumably because he wanted to take paternaty leave after his child was born. Also why wouldn’t you tell coworkers you’re having a baby? It’d be really weird to keep that a secret.
- lukan 3y ago"Also why wouldn’t you tell coworkers you’re having a baby?" It was HR, not some coworker. But yes, it is messed up.
- gsich 3y agoToxic workplace then. HR are people too.
- lb1lf 3y agoCynically speaking, HR is an abstraction layer between management and employees, sorry, 'resources'. When I worked for a huge engineering multinational years ago, it showed time and time again that people went into HR with the best of intentions, but most were as time ground on disillusioned upon finding they were not, after all, employed to help other employees. The good ones mostly left, the poor ones thrived. Sigh. (That being said, I do believe HR has a purpose, ensuring (at least in theory) professional, correct and consistent treatment of employees. Just don't make the mistake of believing they are on your side; they are not.
- zac23or 3y agoThe reason for the poor view of the NH community (outside NH) is clear from the opinions expressed here. From defending Amazon's right to pay low wages to “it's easy, just quit” demonstrates the disconnection of NH people with reality to the point of full psychopathy. And everyone knows that you never go a full psychopath. The technical part of HN is a delight. But the non-technical part, when something is said about humanities, it's sad. It's as if most of the people at HN were no longer people, they were robot CEOs who defend money above all else. I would love a tag system so I can't view these discussions (I already do this, but sometimes it escapes me)
- polarix 3y agoNo, of course it’s not easy to quit. But perhaps it’s wrong to even offer these terrible jobs as an “opportunity” to people who have so little choice.
- burnerburnson 3y ago[flagged]
- golergka 3y ago> From defending Amazon's right to pay low wages to “it's easy, just quit” demonstrates the disconnection of NH people with reality to the point of full psychopathy. You seem to be under impression that people who express this view do not have sympathy for the workers. That's not true. We just refuse to accept that an employer becomes responsible for a person's condition just because he chooses to purchase the person's labour. When you hire a plumber to fix your pipes, or buy tomatoes from a farmer, you don't become responsible for their condition. You don't have an obligation to pay higher than a market rate, or to continue paying them when you no longer want to. Why would you expect a full-time employer to have these obligations? This doesn't have anything to do with sympathy. My sympathy for the poor people drives to me donate a significant proportion of my income. But I don't have any right to force my notion on charity on other people or organisations.
- throw_m239339 3y ago> When you hire a plumber to fix your pipes, or buy tomatoes from a farmer, you don't become responsible for their condition. You don't have an obligation to pay higher than a market rate, or to continue paying them when you no longer want to. Why would you expect a full-time employer to have these obligations? You know very well these are non sequitur, absurd arguments. If the plumber dies fixing your pipes in your home, you bet your civil liability will be scrutinized. As for the rest of your arguments, the agreement is usually only about the plumber "fixing the pipe", not forcing the plumber to work 10 hours a day, or prevent them from taking more than a 15 minutes lunch break or something, You see the absurdity of your examples? You're acting like there are no differences between an individual contracting a plumber and the relationship between a megacorporation, the employees, and the obvious power imbalance between them. It's usually because you deem your interlocutor an idiot whom you can just patronize with absurd arguments.
- polarix 3y agoI hope courts worldwide continue to punish Amazon for these kinds of things. They need to change the calculus — to ensure that the total operational cost of hiring people to do these terrible jobs is much higher than using robots.
- lukan 3y ago" to ensure that the total operational cost of hiring people to do these terrible jobs is much higher than using robots." He was not crushed by machinery or anything: "Dariusz worked so hard. His job used to be done by a few people during a shift, but then they made him do all that work alone, pushing around trolleys with heavy boxes." He was simply pushed working too hard. So a robot doing the job would have been one solution - the other simply an extra human helping, or switching tasks, to something less physically demanding.
- polarix 3y agoTrue! There might be other solutions, like having management treat people as they themselves would want to be treated. That kind of thing just sounds fairly unrealistic.
- einpoklum 3y ago> continue to punish Amazon for these kinds of things. Amazon is not punished. That woman was only reinstated in her rock-bottom-wage, back-breaking/RSI-inducing Amazon job. If she'd have gotten some large sum of money as compensation, or if the court had ordered Amazon to enter good-faith negotiations with the union, or accept some of its demands, or to cease warehouse operations temporary etc. - that would have been punishment.
- Geisterde 3y agoDont worry, that calculus is changing day by day regardless. In the second chapter people will be complaining that robots put them out of work.
- fennecfoxy 3y ago
- graphe 3y agoAmazon warehouses have cameras. Lots of them. Do they not in Poland? The man didn't seem to want to quit, from the context, it's possible the person did not tell the truth. He may have worked himself too hard, I've known many people that just didn't quit.
- bornfreddy 3y ago> The man didn't seem to want to quit... For a lot of people quitting (or losing their job) is not an option. I'm sure if they had a choice they wouldn't work in such a place as Amazon warehouse. Let's not blame the victim, we should punish Amazon (and similar corporations) instead. It makes me sad and angry that such things can happen - unfortunately I can't boycot them more than I do already. I'll stop boycotting them when they start treating their employees right... Not holding my breath though.
- graphe 3y ago[flagged]
- whatshisface 3y agoIt's so nice and comforting to think that this person could have died voluntarily, thank you for that fantasy. /s
- neilv 3y agoMy read of the article was that the victim was stuck in the job, and desperately trying to get it made tolerable by petitioning the company, and the company was instead making it worse. I read your message to suggest something very different: that the victim did it to themself, and would work themself to death some other way, if not at this company, and the company is really blameless.
- graphe 3y agoI think the person writing this is biased and using this person's unfortunate death for political gain. Dariusz is a victim of circumstance, a mental unwillingness to stop working for any period of time, a situation I have also tried to stop friends who were exploited from workplaces in the restaurant industry again and again. Only mental health would have saved him from throwing himself off the metaphorical cliff; if not Amazon, another place. You read it correctly but I feel sympathy for the victim.
- einpoklum 3y ago1. Main takeaway I: "Q: Do you think this ruling will change anything in the immediate future? A: ... I’m afraid they will not change their policy. ... They’re just smashing everything on their way to making more and more profit." 2. Main takeaway II: "... Amazon has used Poland as a base from which to attack German unions right next door, either by importing Polish workers as strikebreakers when German warehouses were being picketed or then by simply building warehouses along the German-Polish border to serve the German market and get around German labor laws and unions." 3. Personal suggestion to fellow readers: Please don't use Amazon, and ask your friends to avoid it as well. Yes, a grass-roots consumer boycott is not the most efficient of measures, but we should at least do _something_ other than just shrug and accept it. Also, if there is an Amazon facility near where you live - try to figure out if they're trying to unionize. And if they are, try and help them out, or at least donate.
- hinkley 3y agoYou often can’t stop acquaintances from doing things you don’t condone, but you can stop associating with them and being privy or party to their nonsense. I can’t stop Amazon from being assholes, but it says something about me if I still participate, let others participate on my behalf.
- huqedato 3y agoTypical for Amazon: abuse, fear, intimidation, slavery
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- karolist 3y agoDo not use amazon, do not buy books from amazon, do not use AWS, do not get their certs, do not work in places that use AWS, do not watch prime, do not use their opensource tech.
- latchkey 3y agoWhat does that solve? Amazon employees an uncountable number of people. Put them all out of a job? Edit: Wild that HN would downvote me on this. OP says: "short term thinking". Is that supposed to be for me or them?
- karolist 3y agoshort term thinking
- zogrodea 3y agoThey’re only Amazon employees temporarily. Give equivalent money for other services by different businesses and these different businesses can hire them. I think the point you make could be repeated for every boycott and sanction ever but most people don’t think these methods are inherently unethical.
- latchkey 3y agoIf there was an equivalent solution, why aren't people just working there already?
- zogrodea 3y agoI must have been unclear because that’s not what I intended for people to understand. I was saying, if you want something from Amazon, don’t buy it there but from somewhere else instead (like Barnes & Nobles for ebooks, Azure/GCP for web services, whatever). If people do this on a large enough scale, those businesses will grow and start hiring people. Then the employees may have better places to work. That’s the point of boycotting Amazon, or Amazon might change its ways if the sting hurts too much. (I didn’t downvote you by the way.)
- ProllyInfamous 3y agoI want to take this moment to remind everybody: HR works for the company [not you]. Whistleblower reporting systems work for the GDP [not you]. ---- I was a union electrician for a great apprenticeship; as the article's author admits CONSTRUCTION IS DANGEROUS in different ways. Yet I resonate greatly with the "repetitious motions" lament on account of having literally turned so many screwpost connections [many goobers use basic electric drills to "torque;" not sure how/if this works well].
- ftyhbhyjnjk 3y agoThis is precisely the reason I have strictly ZERO respect for HR department. They are the most hypocrite department in a company. They call it human resources, but all they do is make everyone's jobs difficult. They are the worst of all. Simply the worst. Not to mention, the most arrogant and lazy. Fck them.
- liquidpele 3y agoEven the managers hate them. They make hiring such a pita
- turblety 3y agoBut as frequently stated, Human Resources is not for the employees. It's even in the name. Humans are just a Resource. The whole point of HR is to ensure the company is legally safe from their employees and legislation. If you own a company, you'll love HR. If you work for a company, hate them.
- maronato 3y agoI think the department name is pretty telling: Human Resources. They do the same thing as the IT department, but instead of dealing with printers they deal with people. If your printer is having issues printing or wants to take some time off, you throw it away and get a new one.
- mmcnl 3y agoHR is just a staff department. This is about company culture, not HR.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- paulddraper 3y ago> her efforts to speak out against poor working conditions Sounds like they did her a favor? Or were the working conditions less than ideal but good enough she still wanted to work at Amazon?
- frob 3y agoAmazon should be held accountable for running a safe workplace. Even if she is not there, Amazon should not be allowed to operate an unsafe workhouse that puts its employees in danger. If Amazon has a culture of firing anyone who dares to speak up about unsafe working conditions, it will be allowed to abuse and endanger its employees for profit since no one would be willing to speak up for fear of losing the paycheck that puts a roof over their head and food on their plate.
- graphe 3y agoI didn't know you could get fired from Amazon besides stealing most people just quit.
- turquoisevar 3y agoYour framing is a bit disingenuous. For one, there’s, of course, the simple matter that these kinds of things shouldn’t happen and that cases like hers bring it to light. The implied alternative by you would mean companies can keep being poor employers because people would walk away, and nothing would change for the ones that stay behind and are affected by it. And then there’s, of course, your implication that everyone is in the fortunate position of being able to walk away from a job or let go from a job without the slightest inconvenience. In reality, a lot of people work because they have to survive. Losing a job can be an earth-shattering experience for many because of the implications it has on their ability to survive. The solution to employers creating poor or dangerous work conditions isn’t to say, “Let the market sort it out,” and then blame the victims. The solution is to regulate employers and to punish them hard and often when they create those work conditions. The main reason for this is because of the highly skewed power balance. One side has a fundamental need for survival, the need for money to pay for shelter and food, while the other side mainly has to worry about shareholder value and profits. This power imbalance always ensures there will be people desperate enough to take on any job, no matter how shitty or dangerous, to the point that they’ll even rationalize it and delude themselves. One way to balance out the powers a bit more is regulation on working conditions, and another is creating social safety nets and improving standards of living that guarantee a level of survival regardless of whether you hold a job or not, which allows people to walk away from poor working conditions. It is in countries where these measures are lacking or non/existent, where you see many people taking up jobs that have questionable or outright poor working conditions. This is why you see a proliferation of gig workers, MLMs, and people willing to take on jobs with poor pay and poor working conditions in those countries. You’ll also see the exploitation of people with lesser legal protections in those countries, such as children or undocumented immigrants. Ironically, in countries with better regulations and where they facilitate programs that ensure everyone can survive regardless of employment status, you’ll see more of the classical “free market” effects you allude to. People who walk away from a job that has poor working conditions or people who won’t even take up a job with such conditions, which in turn motivates employers to improve the working conditions beyond the minimum conditions as prescribed in regulation. It turns out that when people don’t have to worry about being homeless and hungry, people can negotiate better working conditions, even if the negotiations are done with their feet.
- playcache 3y agoAmazon are absolutely scumsters, and this is why I would never work for them. I had their recruiters trying to headhunt me for engineering roles in AWS, but they can go and sling one. This is also why I will never buy any goods from them. support local business instead.
- throwayazazaz 3y agoMy teammate's friend died when my teammate was oncall. The skip was super irritated that dude was attending the ceremony instead of "oncall handover". Mind you, that guy still solved Sev-3 issues till the handover.
- advael 3y agoI predict that Amazon's war chest is such that this kind of abuse with impunity will continue indefinitely unless some powerful countries start seriously acting to break them up. Abuse of labor, distortion of markets, distortion of law and even basic governance are all symptoms of letting companies with both more power than most countries and explicit limitation of liability baked in exist. I'd like to see limited liability killed altogether, but the bare minimum to solve problems like this is very aggressive trust-busting
- snird 3y agoAmazon has a kidnapped employee currently being held by Hamas terrorists in Gaza: https://nypost.com/2023/11/30/news/amazon-silent-on-israeli-engineer-who-is-hostage-in-gaza/ https://nypost.com/2023/11/30/news/amazon-silent-on-israeli-... Their disregard for their employees is beyond shameful
- anon831636 3y agoThe family of that employee asked everybody involved, including Amazon, to avoid public comments.
- t1E9mE7JTRjf 3y agoWhat does that have to do with Amazon? Genuine question.
- EchoReflection 3y agoit is sad (and appalling) that so many people around the world are so addicted to "convenience" and material possessions that Amazon flourishes financially despite the huge number of reasons to avoid using that godforsaken abomination of a company. https://www.ethicalconsumer.org/retailers/ten-reasons-avoid-amazon https://www.ethicalconsumer.org/retailers/ten-reasons-avoid-... https://www.greenamerica.org/blog/10-reasons-not-shop-amazon https://www.greenamerica.org/blog/10-reasons-not-shop-amazon https://247wallst.com/special-report/2023/12/08/11-reasons-to-avoid-amazon-today/ https://247wallst.com/special-report/2023/12/08/11-reasons-t... https://financebuzz.com/avoid-shopping-on-amazon https://financebuzz.com/avoid-shopping-on-amazon I realize AMZN employs a huge number of people around the world and that is "good" for the world economy and I am extremely cynical about both unions and gov intervention in business, so idk what the ideal solution is aside from somehow magically convincing people to not use it and choose options that are less easy/convenient.
- Franscoben 3y ago[dead]
- hansonpeter 3y ago[flagged]
- networkchad 3y ago[dead]
- neycoda 3y agoHow much longer will we keep letting our Congress allow corporations to get away with murder and harm? Laws and enforcement are disincentives. They work. We can make things fair for people if we try.