http://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-not-paying-taxes-trump...
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/may...
http://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-not-paying-taxes-trump...
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/may...
There have always been and probably always will be unpleasant jobs. I watched 6 guys replace the roof of my neightbor's house yesterday in Houston. It was 100 degrees on the ground so I'd imagine it was intensely unpleasant working 8 hours on the ashphalt shingle roof. Does that make the roofing business exploitive? Should we all abandon our roofs?
When I worked at Amazon we had to run around the warehouse, bc
if our pick rate fell below a certain number we stopped getting
paid. There were bottles & bins full of piss at odd points, bc
you were penalised for toilet breaks. A co-worker attempted
suicide on-site bc of the stress
Source: https://twitter.com/OwennnThomas/status/1007957414577090560If this isn't exploitation, I'm not sure what it would be.
It's like the meat packing industry... People die there in big numbers, but it just continues.
That's not true. Many times people use the "asking questions" as a ruse to do just that, and erode support for these people by saying it's their own fault for being exploited.
And, quite frankly, I don't care one iota why they stay; there is exactly zero legitimate reason for them to be treated like that. Bezos should be so ashamed of himself that he would be unwilling to show his face in public.
There is always a cost associated with trying to change a job, one that may be difficult for a poor person to pay. You need to do research to find these other job choices (and you really may not have many choices depending on where you live), apply to multiple places, show up for interviews, etc. Doing all these activities takes time and energy, which a person, who is possibly already struggling to make ends meet, may not have. Imagine coming home from your grueling warehouse job where you had to pee in bottles, putting together a dinner for yourself and your kids, doing some basic chores around the house so that your place doesn't turn into a shithole, and then finding the energy to do all the things you need to do for finding a job.
It's easy to pontificate while sitting in our cushy tech job chairs, where if we don't like the current job, there'll be 10 recruiters blowing up your email with job opportunities, about what a person who may be less fortunate should do.
> I think it's just easier to blame Amazon than for people to make different choices. It is possible that some blame lies with both parties, but Amazon definitely shares a clear (and rather heavier) burden of blame here, and there is nothing wrong in calling that out.
It's not easy for a lot of people to find jobs. It's not easy to go weeks without pay while you apply, wait for drug tests to come back, go through initial onboarding, and then wait 2-3 weeks for your first paycheck.
The fault is not with the person being exploited, it's with the exploiters.
That’s a great question and I’m sure the answer would be interesting. Assuming most people working there to be unreasonable or illogical would be unfair to then.
> There are other jobs I’m sure
Or is there ? What’s the criteria for “other job” ? How do they look for it, when, on what terms ?
If that many people are just stuck there, I think it’s just not a “I just quit and go work for some other 9 to 5 job tomorrow” situation.
1. College is expensive. Outside of the trades and a few other exceptions, a college degree used to be the best way for young people or unskilled laborers to get into higher-paying, more stable jobs. That math doesn't work out so well anymore, and there are continuing efforts to further increase the individual cost of a college degree. The percentage of college graduates in the U.S. has risen only a few points since the late 70s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_attainment_in_the_...
2. Lack of affordable health care is preventing a lot of people from opting out of the job market. If you have any kind of illness that requires regular treatment, or even if you're worried about getting bankrupted by an injury, then you're forced to look for employers offering company health insurance, even if the pay is crap. Amazon offers health insurance for their full-time employees: http://www.amazondelivers.jobs/about/benefits/. As long as there isn't a sensible, publicly-supported health care system in the US, companies will be able to exploit this to get and retain workers at a net discount.
3. Rising housing costs in many urban areas are further squeezing a lot of people.
4. Upside-down tax structures and other financial incentives (like the ones described in this article) are further moving a lot of money from the poor to the rich. These factors together are creating a de facto peasant class, and massive companies like Amazon are doing their level best to ensure that it stays that way. It is a really good deal for Amazon when they can work this system well enough to get the public to subsidize their employees' food costs (https://yro.slashdot.org/story/18/04/21/1634237/many-amazon-...). Remember when the Silicon Valley big-wigs colluded to create a non-competitive job market for tech employees (http://fortune.com/2015/09/03/koh-anti-poach-order/)? And out of that lawsuit, the tech workers got just $5k on average. That was a fantastic deal for the companies.
So if you're a low-skilled worker, that doesn't leave you a lot of options on the table. You hear Amazon advertising (via some staffing firm) for warehouse positions in your area, it sounds like they'll hire anybody, you've heard the work conditions are bad but you figure it'll be temporary, and hey, health insurance, if you're lucky enough to be considered a full-time employee by the company.
Fix health insurance, and more people would get into the trades. Fix education, and more people would get a degree. Fix housing, and people would be less desperate for crappy work. Fix regulation, and communities would get a lot wealthier.
Unfortunately, none of that appears to be happening anytime soon, because there's a long line of people willing to argue against any of those things for one ideological reason or another, because the situation hasn't gotten quite bad enough, quite fast enough, for them to see anything wrong with it.
And quite frankly, I honestly do not care if there are other jobs or not. That kind of treatment is completely unacceptable, and there is zero legitimate reason for Amazon to treat them that way.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/04/26/truck-driver...
There seems to be this bubble of thinking on HN that hard labor jobs don't pay well. The reality is they pay more than your average IT Support job. They are in demand because they can't find people willing to do the work. Another example is electricians. Some electrician companies are so desperate for skilled electricians that they are paying their retirees to come out of retirement and still allowing them to keep pension benefits. Another one is plumbing, etc.
Roofing especially in a hot climate is harder more demanding work than a warehouse job. And it pays considerably more.
Roofing pays a premium because it is a crap entry level job that is hard to staff with reliable workers. The labor force is generally limited to younger able bodied men with transportation who are willing to do seasonal work.
Amazon can recruit almost anyone to do picking and can get value even from the people whom they purge.
Have any evidence of this or is it purely anecdotal? Many warehouses aren't air conditioned, especially Amazon ones.
https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-warehouse-2011-9
> Amazon kept paramedics in the parking lot of the warehouse to treat employees who were fainting, suffering from dehydration, or exhaustion.
Then again, while the warehouse I worked in had much less stringent metrics than Amazon’s, there were other factors that may have made it worse overall.
People do have choices.
6 guys, 8 hours? Seems reasonable. The Amazon way would be 4 guys working 16 hours, but I’m rotating shifts so that you don’t have to pay OT, but knowing that the rotation is such that people won’t leave the job site. And when somone goes 1-minute over their 15 minute break they are fired and replaced on the spot.
Amazon treats people as inanimate objects completely devoid of humanity.
What are you talking about? You've moved the conversation away from a specific discussion of Amazon's practices to an anicdote.
Unpleasant does not equal exploitative. Amazon is unpleasant and exploitative.
Also, please don't be uncivil in comments here, even when another comment is wrong or annoying. ("What are you talking about?" is the sort of nasty elbow that can and should just be edited out of a post.)
Not really. It's an ongoing discussion sparked by the number of articles that appear on the front page that are deeply related to the economics of the tech industry. It interests me. If genuine comments responding to articles from a particular and consistent point of view are unwanted I can stop.
Everytime I log in something like this is at the top of the front page. Even now this is there: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17804202
I understand your concerns and as it's not my platform fair enough. Will do better.
> If you'd review the rules
Will do
> please don't be uncivil in comments here
Fair and noted.
I've posted other explanations of our thinking about this, in case it's of interest: https://hn.algolia.com/?amp;sort=byDate&dateRange=all&am....
I love this job a lot more than my old sales jobs which involved needless travel, quotas, pressures, and lots of layoffs!
That "probably" is doing a lot of work there. I'd wager a bunch of us are on this website because we want to make changes in the world. We're not excited about computers because they pay well, we're excited about computers because they let us do cool things. We're not interested in disrupting entrenched industries because we are bored and want to amuse ourselves, we're interested in disrupting entrenched industries because we think we can do better. And when we say better that implies that we have a sense of good and bad and how to incrementally get closer to good.
So what is the world we want to build? We, humanity collectively, control whether there will be unpleasant jobs. No god told us, "Thou shalt build roofs in 100-degree weather or pay the consequences." We control what jobs exist. There are people working on robotics, right? I can imagine a world where nobody works 8 hours in 100-degree weather on an asphalt roof any more. And whether I call that job "exploitative" is pretty irrelevant to whether we're getting closer to that world.
There have always been unpleasant jobs, yes. Whether there will be is up to us.
Yes, they're getting picked on because they are the most exploitive (extreme tax avoidance, worker abuse, etc). It seems that would be the first org you would pick on: the one causing the most damage. Why would we pursue or focus on the orgs doing the least amount of damage first?
But there's only one of me.
That isn't the point though. Like Facebook and privacy issues, the ultimate outcome of this will either be (a) nothing, or (b) government singles out Amazon alone for scrutiny, which does nothing to stop the same systemic problem that happens at many other employers also but goes unreported because the company in question isn't tech-sexy (Wal-Mart, Ford, etc).
The fix needs to be applied universally, without considering how much damage individual orgs are doing.
Appreciate any feedback you provide!
That's not close to what the person you replied to said though. They simply said that Amazon is not alone in doing this. That it's a much larger problem.
> How would you argue against such an argument?
I wouldn't. I would see anyone saying: "Someone else does X" as providing additional evidence this an even bigger problem. So Amazon isn't the only one doing this? Walmart is also doing this, as well as other companies. What can we do to stop this all-together? Because focusing on Amazon won't solve the problem. In fact, in some ways it becomes easier when there are many "someone elses" doing X, because then it comes a general problem, and not a specific attack on any one company someone might have an attachment to for some reason.
Local jurisdictions can and do give steep tax (and other) discounts to attract businesses and stadiums (just two examples). You would have to revoke local governing authority to prevent these sorts of venue shopping (IANAL; if you have better suggestions, I’m all ears). I don’t believe that is realistic, so I don’t argue that as a legitimate solution.
Maybe you could tax at a federal level where you can overrule local taxing policy (similar to new SALT deduction constraints in federal tax policy), negating the benefits of venue shopping.
Yet... this is Amazon, and HN hates Amazon.
It’s pretty hard to have a business of any size and not touch Amazon in anyway. Amazon, in many ways, has becoming embedded the as GE once was.
They do pay taxes...
"According to an analysis from the ITEP, the gap between the tax rate that some local tax jurisdictions impose and what Amazon collects can be as much as 7.5 percentage points in Homer, AK., for example."
http://fortune.com/2018/03/29/amazon-tax-rate-president-dona...
'To be clear, Amazon purchased only the trailers and will use third-party companies for the actual truck cabs and drivers. The original source report did not make clear there was a distinction.'
https://www.technobuffalo.com/2015/12/04/amazon-prime-now-ha...
Presumably Amazon funds paid to delivery services are also used to pay for gas, which therefore indirectly pays for the roads.
You could make a (good) argument that they are underpaying their contract drivers, but nontheless -- everytime they pay a contract driver to drop a package off at your house, Amazon is paying for that gas in their pay to the delivery driver.
The same is true when they use a commercial delivery service at all -- the cost of fuel tax is bundled into the delivery price.
Whether Amazon owns any trucks of their own is immaterial, if they are contracting with Amazom, Amazon is ultimately paying for the fuel (including taxes).
https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2015/05/debunking-the...
https://frontiergroup.org/reports/fg/who-pays-roads
They pay less for the roads than you or I. You are subsidizing Amazon's business with your taxes.