4 ms·
The more important thing it does though is remove culpability from the employee who doesn't have a job anymore. That person will be looking for a job (we assum
by bluGill 1y ago
The more important thing it does though is remove culpability from the employee who doesn't have a job anymore. That person will be looking for a job (we assume, perhaps a few will just retire or something else). The companies they apply at will want to know why they no longer work at Amazon - there is a big difference between "I was sexually harassing my coworkers" (pick a crime, sexual harassment seems to be the big one these days), and "Amazon decided they didn't need my job done any more".
- rco8786 1y agoThat's why "layoff" is the right word to use. It makes it clear that it was Amazon's decision and not through any direct fault of the employee.
- pinnochio 1y agoYes. Job loss is what the employee experiences, not the employer.
- _DeadFred_ 1y agoThe owner of the employer company just experienced a vacation in space, renting an entire European country for a wedding, etc. Some employees are going to experience losing their housing. Losing their health benefits while sick. Children will be moved from their friends/schools. Some will lose their careers as they won't find new related work quick enough and will have to take whatever they can get for their next job. While the owner vacations in space for fun.
- Jensson 1y agoThose are unrelated, the same would happen regardless if it was owned by millions via their pension plans or a few billionaires, both are equally greedy and immediately move their investments for 1% higher returns, the CEO's at these companies are servants to that inhuman level of greed that comes from dissociated masses of people being owners.
- FeloniousHam 1y agoAnd said greed (by both founder and shareholders) produced a company that so enriched them BY BEING FAVORED BY BILLIONS(!) of customers worldwide to provide access to range goods with a convenience, price, and speed experienced only by the wealthy just a few years earlier :). Ugh, Capitalism.
- _DeadFred_ 1y agoYes the wealthy, famous for their love of cheap 'from China to the landfill' goods and life risking fake fuses, counterfeit Calvin Klein underwear, and supplements spiked with hidden drugs or that are just plain toxic. Ugh capitalism is right. https://www.cspi.org/article/fda-alert-supplements-amazon-poison-drugs https://www.cspi.org/article/fda-alert-supplements-amazon-po... https://www.consumerreports.org/health/fda-finds-hidden-drugs-in-weight-loss-sexual-enhancement-dietary-supplements-sold-on-amazon-ebay-a6199440119/ https://www.consumerreports.org/health/fda-finds-hidden-drug... https://kagi.com/search?q=amazon+fake+fuses https://kagi.com/search?q=amazon+fake+fuses
- FeloniousHam 1y agoI am confuse. I don't know how much Amazon cares about what's sold on their site (probably more than eBay?), but they have most liberal return policy on the internet, and from the one seller I've personally met, they're hard on vendors. Bad products and services exists in all markets, choice is the cure. Is it Amazon branded products your upset with? I guess don't buy them? I genuinely do not understand your argument.
- _DeadFred_ 1y agoFunny, every company prior to around 2010 the owners felt the pain of the employees and were seen as at least partially human. Sure post 2010 an anti-societal cohesion element of 'maximum extraction now' has taken over the ownership and political classes trying to speedrun societal breakdown/collapse, but that was not the norm or acceptable (you would have even be ostracized from the ownership/capital class) for all of my life prior to 2010.
- SoftTalker 1y agoNo employer is going to discuss reasons for a termination. Too much potential liability.
- taeric 1y agoMost all will answer whether or not it was "with cause" if someone calls them up, though? Specifically because they have to if the caller is about unemployment, no?
- SoftTalker 1y agoI'm not in HR but as I understand it most companies will not say anything other than confirming dates of employment.
- taeric 1y agoThey won't confirm if the termination was the choice of the employee or the company? Doesn't that have implications for unemployment benefits?
- nradov 1y agoMost employers won't confirm the reason for termination with random callers who are verifying employment history. Unemployment insurance is a bit different. When a former employee files for unemployment benefits then the state will notify the last employer, and that employer can dispute the claim if the termination was for cause. In practice many employers don't dispute unemployment claims even for employees whom they terminated for performance reasons because it's not worth the hassle.