10 ms·
I’m not sure why the general sentiment here is that Amazon workers do not deserve a living wage and should be replaced with robots. All the best to the union,
by okokhacker 2y ago
I’m not sure why the general sentiment here is that Amazon workers do not deserve a living wage and should be replaced with robots.
All the best to the union, I sincerely hope they meet your demands.
- billy99k 2y agoAmazon warehouse work pays almost $20/hour where I live, which is well above the federal minimum wage and more than almost every other company in the area for this type of work. This is a living wage. "should be replaced with robots" I also think it's funny we are having this discussion. When songwriters and other creators were complaining about piracy in the 2000s, the general response from the tech community was that this was the future and you didn't deserve to earn a living. My response is the same.
- greesil 2y agoMinimum wage != Livable wage I don't think it's worth considering the comparison. But sure, maybe working at a distribution center pays well enough where you're located. Likely that's not the case where these strikes are happening. It's expensive out there. Also, what you wrote gives the impression of "I've got mine already so I don't care what happens to you."
- abduhl 2y agoDefine what a livable wage is then. Is it $25/hr? $50/hr? $100/hr?
- mbauman 2y ago$20/hr fulltime is ~40k/yr or ~$3300/mo. As just one benchmark: can you find housing in your area for $1100/mo?
- philipov 2y agoTo start with, any definition that ends with a constant number is wrong. The living wage in an area depends on the cost of living in that area. I don't have that number on hand, but I expect it to be included in any discussion of what people should get payed. After that, we need to ask how much profit a person should be allowed to make on their labor.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- DiggyJohnson 2y agoOkay everyone recognizes this is true. Please share a reasonable number for a medium COL city, ballpark.
- Hikikomori 2y agoHealthcare, decent sized apartment, 5 weeks of paid vacation, free or easily affordable pre school, overtime pay, decent schools and free college, is a good start. Then some left over on top after essentials so you aren't living paycheck to paycheck.
- aio2 2y agoYea no. I understand the sentiment and agree with it, but not exactly feasible for a lot of companies, especially for the type of job they offer
- Hikikomori 2y agoSo you acknowledge that the job should be done but the people doing it deserve to live in squalor even though they work a full time job. Just for corporate profit and your convenience. Just so you know, all things I listed are things most people in Western Europe already have. Including employees of Amazon and McDonald's.
- aio2 2y agoHere's my perspective. Not exactly related, but I hope you understand how I think: If I am a small shipping company, and all I need is someone to wrap boxes and store them, and the load isn't much, then should I be paying them full time for the job? Heck, should I pay them a living wage? No. I pay them the value of the job. Obviously, we need a certain minimum wage because nobody deserves to get scammed and make 10 cents a day, but at the same time, this push for all these benefits isn't realistic. I wish it was, but it isn't. Obviously, my example is different from Amazon, but this is more a business owner perspective.
- int_19h 2y agoIf they are working for you full time, but you aren't paying them living wage, how exactly are they supposed to make ends meet?
- greesil 2y ago[flagged]
- kasey_junk 2y agoIt’s not like this is an unstudied concept. Here is one calculator: https://livingwage.mit.edu/pages/methodology https://livingwage.mit.edu/pages/methodology
- SoftTalker 2y agoEveryone deserves the opportunity to earn a livable income, but not all jobs can or should be paying a "living wage." Some jobs by their nature are part time and some people only want to work part time.
- greesil 2y agoUh sure. Then why are they striking? I honestly don't know.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 2y agoSome large number of them have been "agitated". You can't acknowledge that propaganda exists which is capable of manipulating people into doing things they wouldn't do on their own (or that they shouldn't do), and then say that the left does not create that sort of propaganda. They're striking not for better wages, but so that some local or state politician wins an election in 2026.
- EarlKing 2y agoYeah, they're being agitated alright... by horrible working conditions, declining real wages, and the people who apologize for it and pretend they're all bots or something rather than real people with real interests that are every bit as deserving of respect as some corpo's bottom line. Anyone thinking this is a one time thing and is going to blow over hasn't been paying attention.
- sumOne00 2y agoNegative. All jobs should be paying liveable wages. One off type of jobs for 'this and that' sure, but showing up every day and expectation for deliverables or being on time? Absolutely, pay a liveable wage. Too many Ferrari, BMW, new speed boat from the PPP loans greed to show that employees mean nothing. All jobs deserve liveable wages. We should be advocating for a more peaceful society.
- bangaloredud 2y ago[flagged]
- footcream 2y ago[flagged]
- azemetre 2y ago$20/hr still isn't much money and you can only survive, note I'm not saying thrive here, on that amount in the poor areas in America. There are very few jobs that actually pay well in America nowadays, and the ones that do tend to be congregated in few geographical areas and require extensive schooling. The vast majority of Americans deserve more money. Also check your priors, there are many musicians that do not complain about piracy and even partake in it (see Trent Reznor being part of oink/what, or Dead Kennedys encouraging people to record music on their tapes). I know many musicians that would upload their music on private trackers, regardless of what their label wanted or said.
- webdood90 2y ago> The vast majority of Americans deserve more money. This is pedantic but I strongly dislike when people say anyone deserves anything. I support an equitable system that allows citizens to move up in economic class (which we don't currently have) but I don't subscribe to the idea that everyone inherently deserves anything.
- sterlind 2y agoThat puts you at odds with the tradition of natural rights. The Declaration of Independence says everyone deserves life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
- ekianjo 2y agoDoes not mean that they deserve a specific fixed income...
- webdood90 2y agoI think it's an intellectually dishonest interpretation of my reply
- sterlind 2y agoNo, I don't think so. You specifically rejected the idea that everyone inherently deserves anything. Objectivists would agree, but I don't think Ayn Rand would have been popular with Jefferson. Perhaps you could clarify - what do you mean by "everyone", and what do you mean by "anything?" Does everyone deserve UBI? Do workers deserve disposable income? Do the homeless deserve housing? Healthcare? Food? An attorney, if arrested? Do children deserve college? High school? Primary school? Orphanages? You can't say that nobody inherently deserves anything, then say I'm intellectually dishonest when I take you at your word.
- 93po 2y agoI think your standard for a living wage is way, way too low. We should be able to comfortably afford food, housing, and medical care at minimum - both without spending most of your paycheck, to be able to afford it during periods of joblessness, and with a retirement at a reasonably young age. You cannot do this at $20/hour, and the only reason this isn't the normal standard is incredible greed and capitalism.
- ThunderSizzle 2y agoA livable wage is a wage a husband can make to raise a family, including housing, food, transportation, schooling, etc. $20/hr is about $40k/yr. Using 30% towards housing, that means they can only denote $12/yr to housing, or $1k/month. At current interest rates, that translates to a $150,000 house. What can you get for $150? There's nothing in any area I've looked that was actually habitable ever since the government's COVID debacle.
- therealdrag0 2y agoI’m pretty sure I’ve seen people buying in the 100-200 range on r/FirstTimeHomeBuyers. Nit sure where tho.
- regnull 2y agoI don't think it's a question of who deserves what. They deserve a living wage. The kids deserve to get their presents on time. I deserve a pony. The question is how whether to see it as a smart tactical choice to get that they "deserve" or a cynical move to strike when they get maximum publicity and do maximum damage.
- onlyrealcuzzo 2y agoIsn't that the whole point of a strike? You're going to have a bad time if you plan your strike at the most opportune time for your company. Whether or not striking is good for society is a separate discussion, but striking when you have the most leverage over your company makes the most sense for those striking to get what they want.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y agoJust to add to this, the point of laborers striking is to show the company the value of their labor. If laborers not laboring means profiteers not profiting, it's good for the laborers' negotiating power because the profiteers really want to profit.
- aguaviva 2y agoI would apply the term "cynical" to the decisions made by Amazon's management which create the working conditions that compel their workers to strike, while providing top 1% compensation to themselves. These people are just doing what they have to do to survive. If anything, going on strike a truly desparate move. Insinuating that they are childishing in doing so (as if they feel they "deserve a pony") on the other hand, seems simply -- snide.
- BugsJustFindMe 2y ago> I’m not sure why the general sentiment here is that Amazon workers do not deserve a living wage and should be replaced with robots These are two entirely unrelated issues. If the world doesn't need a particular task to be done by humans, then the task should be performed by robots. Until that happens, the workers should be treated humanely.
- mschuster91 2y ago> If the world doesn't need a particular task to be done by humans, then the task should be performed by robots. The problem is, our society isn't ready for that shift, not even close. Employment opportunities for the low skilled have all but gone down the drain - there is a reason why Walmart, Amazon and the other usual suspects love to set up shop in devastated communities: they have a captive audience that has no other realistic opportunities for gainful employment and thus is much, much less likely to resist when faced with exploitative and/or abusive conditions. Warehouse work and logistics in general is the last employment opportunity many of these people have, and while it being replaced by robots may be better for society as a whole (if one follows the belief that all work should be done by machines so that humans can follow their individual interests), just standing by idling around while the markets enforce the shift is going to be a political disaster.
- Dalewyn 2y ago>while it being replaced by robots may be better for society as a whole (if one follows the belief that all work should be done by machines so that humans can follow their individual interests) While "robots" are a fairly recent concept, the advancement of human civilization has been predicated on ever increasing efficiencies of human labor.
- jedberg 2y agoThe problem is, since the beginning of time, all the improvements were in mechanical work, allowing humans to shift towards more intellectual work. Now the "robots" are replacing intellectual work, and humans have no where to go.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- spamizbad 2y agoWhat's funny is even if you hate unions, surely the demographics who frequent HN at least has a solid grasp of the capital investments and R&D costs necessary to "replace them with robots" - We are talking about delivery station roles here. You gotta build something that, amortized, can do it for less than $500/day in a climate where Wall Street is putting pressure on tech stocks to control costs. Have at it. We heard this same argument about automation in food service. Remember when Miso/Flippy was going to put all those $20/hour fast food workers out on the street? Turns out hiking prices was way easier.
- irq-1 2y ago(off topic) I was thinking today about how robots should throw packages to each other. It'd be faster and it's all the things robots are great at: hand-eye coordination, weight and holding angle, and group coordination.
- skeeter2020 2y agothink of how you do any similar activity; is the slow part walking a short, line of sight distance?
- jedberg 2y ago> We heard this same argument about automation in food service. Have you been to a fast food joint lately? Even at peak traffic they have maybe three people working when they used to have 7-10. Now you walk in and you have to order from the kiosk, which is literally the iPhone app on a vertical touch screen. You don't even talk to a human until they hand you the food.
- nine_k 2y agoOrdering from a machine actually makes sense, and, crucially, is easy to implement. Replacing the actual burger-fliping workers, or order-assembling workers is much harder. An adequate robot, even if built with today's technologies, will likely never pay for itself.