Instead the article was about the Teamsters union convincing local governments to block Amazon from opening buildings, and Amazon "fighting back" by increasing their hiring of needy ex-cons and minorities from local colleges, ending their marijuana drug tests, and otherwise working to ingratiate themselves with their comminities.
The Teamsters don't come out looking like the good guys...
It's an isolate and destroy campaign. Hiring students and ex-inmates (who will both probably tolerate more exploitation than average employees without speaking up), does not impact Amazon's bottom line nearly as much as unionized workers would. If enough people wind up thinking Amazon provides a net benefit to the communities it operates in then it will help silence those who want unions, tax reforms, or just less corporate welfare.
The teamsters don't look bad so much as they appear to have been badly outplayed by a smart opponent.
I wonder how many people who called out Amazon’s supposedly enlightened actions as unlikely to be altruistic or genuine were accused of being conspiracy theorists.
And even apart from questions of economic systems, second-guessing peoples' motives is almost never productive.
None of those things obviate the need for a union.
Also, let's not forget that Amazon has unlimited funds to cover up and distract from their misdoings while the Teamsters do not.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/feb/05/amazon-wo...
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/amazon-used-...
This is often the case.
>Instead the article was about
Yeah, it's a bait and switch designed to attract Amazon haters with the headline and then convince them Amazon is the good guy in the content. Seems like it worked really well based on comments here. I'm sure vox will be duely rewarded by their Amazon overlords.