I really don't trust Amazon for a lot of things now, and would rather go directly to the seller on their site. Especially now that I've gotten older, I just want less stuff but with higher quality.
I really don't trust Amazon for a lot of things now, and would rather go directly to the seller on their site. Especially now that I've gotten older, I just want less stuff but with higher quality.
FWIW, I stopped using Amazon when the German strikes started and we found out what was going on. Europe can live without abusive companies like that, even if it makes our stuff a bit more expensive. I know I wasn't the only one.
While walmart was not perfect, and some middle managers could make life hell for some workers, as a company most of the crap I saw on the news was just rhetoric or things taken out of context by union organizers for the purposes for try to get a union installed.
Having lived through that, I see alot of that being echo'ed in the amazon debate. Unions look to gain ALOT of revenue from unionizing these companies, I am not sure why everyone always assumes the motivation of the union is altruistic and the motivations of the company is always evil
The world is much more Gray than the employee vs management dynamic people seem to subscribe
Both a company and a union do their little dances on the news. Nobody believes either one is telling 100% of the truth. We've all seen unions start strikes for stupid reasons, or sing la-la-la-I-cant hear-you when a member clearly needed help
But, it's common around here to have multiple unions in 1 company. You can shop around if you don't like one. You can not join any union. This market dynamic makes unions compete for you. Both unions and workers also understand that they won't gain anything if they drive a company out of business or to another country.
Specifically for Amazon, we've never heard much about Walmart or anti-walmart rhetoric over here. We have hard discounters which can be demanding for their employees, but they don't clash that hard or that regularly as Amazon does. Things like the bottle peeing are new around here, and confirmed by other parties than the unions. Ignoring collective agreements is also unheard of for a company of this scale. The underlying general idea around Amazon seems that it tries to import an US-style no-rights-worker model into Europe. If that takes root, we're all worse off. People sympathize with that, even if it is rarely enough to counter the siren song of cheap goods.
that is not the US system and why I personally get sooo frustrated with Europeans commenting on US labor relation, and US Unions. Europeans look at the issue from their lens, of their laws, and their unions which is completely different from the US. You can not compare the two at all.
At best in the US if you happen to be in a right to work state you can choose not the join the (and I mean THE, singular) union that represents the work force at the company. that is a "labor" union
The closest we have to EU style unions would be a trade union, but even then normally there is a single union that represents a trade, like the "Screen Actors Guild" for actors. There are not multiples.
>Specifically for Amazon, we've never heard much about Walmart or anti-walmart rhetoric over here.
Anti-Walmart rhetoric started to die off around 2010.
>Things like the bottle peeing are new around here, and confirmed by other parties than the unions.
It is in the US as well, and i take these stories with extreme skepticism.
>The underlying general idea around Amazon seems that it tries to import an US-style no-rights-worker model into Europe
Again the US has plenty of labor laws, the primary difference between the US and Europe is the amount of required paid benefits an employer must offer, but abusive actions (such as forcing an employee to pee in a bottle) is no more legal in the US than in Europe
> If that takes root, we're all worse off.
I have no problems with US Labor laws, remember the US is very individualist, and for the most part, most of the population prefers this. I have no desire to have the government dictate to me and my employer how many vacation days I have must have or things like that. I am not soo extreme as I to say all labor laws should go away, I think laws that prevent true abuse (like requiring an employee to pee in a bottle, or requiring employees to stand for hours off the clock at security check points unpaid) are area's where the government can and should step in, but that is where it should end.
> I stopped using amazon a few years back after reading over and over
> about their treatment of warehouse employees
And yet, Linked reports that Amazon is the #1 best place to work to grow one's career in the United States:https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/top-companies-2022-50-best-wo...
The latter are effectively treated like shit.
The report you linked is completely off topic and probably bullshit PR anyway.
Definitely a good point!
> The latter are effectively treated like shit.
That said, based on almost everyone’s feedback who I know that’s been a software engineer, they are effectively treated like shit too, just better paid than the warehouse staff.
Cons, could always be paid more and oncall is tough.
But the press won’t even take issue with Amazon’s comingling. I wonder why. The press always seems to cry on the working conditions, without ever mentioning how dangerous the products are to consumers too. I bet our governments have ties with Jeff Bezos…
Here, the problem isn't that items are put together in the same basket, it's that they are counterfeit: no seller should have any "new" inventory of the book, at all; new inventory should only come from the publisher. As the publisher isn't an Amazon seller, Amazon itself needs to buy the book from the publisher, and carry it in their own inventory.
Not commingling, ie carrying a separate inventory for each vendor, doesn't change the problem at all: all inventory not coming directly from the publisher is counterfeit.
In theory, it could be possible for other vendors to buy from the publisher and then sell on Amazon; in practice this is highly unlikely. But Amazon doesn't care and doesn't do any basic check.
They are probably hiding behind the fact that the sellers are doing the counterfeiting, not them. IANAL, but since they obviously benefit from it, it should be possible to sue, not just in civil court, but in criminal court as well.
For other products, that’s isn’t so. For say a laptop memory card, there’s a dozen authorized distributors that supply various resellers.
The whole issue is Amazon saying “Fuck you, we’re Amazon” to the market.
So naively, you should only be able to get "new" using the sold from Amazon* (as they get stock from Ingram periodically) or by my back-stop listing which is out of my own personal inventory.
What I've found out since is that some of the resellers are able to order directly from Ingram and so can somewhat legitimately offer a "new" copy for sale through Amazon. Their listing prices are always above the default Amazon price as they need to recover the Amazon selling fee (greater than the 28% wholesale discount I offer through Ingram).
Unfortunately, when Amazon's stock is out they frequently list such sellers as the primary seller on the product page (buy now) rather than my own listing (which is in name of the publisher).
So if you see a listing of "new" and it is below the official Amazon price, it is not really new. It may be "like new" but it is definitely not new. Those listings at prices higher than Amazon's may, or may not, be new.
*Ingram is able to distribute to a long list of booksellers so it is entirely possible a book is printed on demand off an order through say BarnesandNoble.com. While I do not get any info on who Ingram sells to, it is pretty easy to track Amazon's by their references to either how many remain in stock or "more on the way" and a print order hitting Lightning Source.
Add on Amazon's treatment of warehouse workers as icing on the cake and nah, I'm good.