Each of the video’s six sections, which the narrator states are “specifically designed to give you the tools that you need for success when it comes to labor organizing,” take place in an animated simulacrum of a Fulfillment Center. The video’s narrators are clad in the reflective vests typical of the real-world setting. “We are not anti-union, but we are not neutral either,” the video states, drawing a distinction that would likely be largely academic to potential organizers. To expound on what non-neutrality might look like, the video adds in plain language (emphasis ours):
“We do not believe unions are in the best interest of our customers, our shareholders, or most importantly, our associates. Our business model is built upon speed, innovation, and customer obsession—things that are generally not associated with union. When we lose sight of those critical focus areas we jeopardize everyone’s job security: yours, mine, and the associates’.”
Here are a few of the (extensive) examples “that can indicate associate disengagement, vulnerability to organizing, or early organizing activity,” according to the video:
Use of words like “living wage” and “steward”
Distribution of petitions and fliers
Associates raising concerns on behalf of their coworkers
Wearing union t-shirts, hats, or jackets
Workers “who normally aren’t connected to each other suddenly hanging out together”
Workers showing an “unusual interest in policies, benefits, employee lists, or other company information”
Increased negativity in the workplace
“[A]ny other associate behavior that is out of character”
Each of the video’s six sections, which the narrator states are “specifically designed to give you the tools that you need for success when it comes to labor organizing,” take place in an animated simulacrum of a Fulfillment Center. The video’s narrators are clad in the reflective vests typical of the real-world setting. “We are not anti-union, but we are not neutral either,” the video states, drawing a distinction that would likely be largely academic to potential organizers. To expound on what non-neutrality might look like, the video adds in plain language (emphasis ours):
“We do not believe unions are in the best interest of our customers, our shareholders, or most importantly, our associates. Our business model is built upon speed, innovation, and customer obsession—things that are generally not associated with union. When we lose sight of those critical focus areas we jeopardize everyone’s job security: yours, mine, and the associates’.”
We're not against unions, but we will imply that you will not be making an union's here if you want a pay check.
Each of the video’s six sections, which the narrator states are “specifically designed to give you the tools that you need for success when it comes to labor organizing,” take place in an animated simulacrum of a Fulfillment Center. The video’s narrators are clad in the reflective vests typical of the real-world setting. “We are not anti-union, but we are not neutral either,” the video states, drawing a distinction that would likely be largely academic to potential organizers. To expound on what non-neutrality might look like, the video adds in plain language (emphasis ours):
“We do not believe unions are in the best interest of our customers, our shareholders, or most importantly, our associates. Our business model is built upon speed, innovation, and customer obsession—things that are generally not associated with union. When we lose sight of those critical focus areas we jeopardize everyone’s job security: yours, mine, and the associates’.”
The video is gone now, it seems. But I will say that it doesn't seem any more harsh than the one I watched while working for Shaw's/Supervalu.
Not that it makes it ok, just standard practice. Which is bad.
You all might have heard about Amazon announcing the other day in the face of a prolonged campaign from workers, Senator Sanders, and others that it would be raising the company wide minimum wage to $15 an hour.
I'm cool with monthly bonuses etc going away if (and only if) the workers are paid right in the first place instead. Eg. tipping vs paying waiters a livable wage.
However, I'm pretty sure Amazon has done maths and found that paying their workers more and cutting the bonuses saves them money.
I'm cool with monthly bonuses etc going away if (and only if) the workers are paid right in the first place instead. Eg. tipping vs paying waiters a livable wage.
However, I'm pretty sure Amazon has done maths and found that paying their workers more and cutting the bonuses saves them money.
I wouldn't count on that, at least as a direct equation, though it's entirely possible as a side benefit. The workers might actually be better off, and the cutting of bonuses just helps Amazon subsidize things.
What it DOES do, is get people off their back, both socially and legislatively, and that might mean a better stock price and/or revenues in the long term.
When you've got a shitty reputation for exploitation, people aren't as happy to give you money. Nike stock took a dive when the child labor shit came to light. Maybe Amazon is wanting to getting ahead of this, as cheaply as possible.
Still craven, but can't expect corporations to give a shit in our current economy. Hope? Sure. Expect? Nope.
Any RSUs they would have gotten are going to be less than what they're gaining in a lot of areas, and come with a lot less weirdness and risk, and also reduces the chances that people do harmful things to hold on exactly long enough for things to vest.
It sucks that they aren't getting even more of a benefit from all of this, but it still looks like a real benefit in most cases, and without the strings attached.
Also depending on how they do bonuses, do away with those and replacing them could be better for the bottom line in a less intuitive way.
If they actually base bonuses on merit, that means having to have someone track performance. Look at numbers and the figure out who gets a bonus and how much. They might not lay those people off because they could always have those people focus more on quality control and figure out where things are under performing. Granted they could cut those people and not have to have those positions around anymore.
Even if they do it the laziest way, there is probably still a certain level of number crunching and hour tracking. So again that's either human resources that could be refocused on something that does more for the bottom line or cut as a cost savings measure.
Plus, 15 dollars an hour is more reliable than either bonus or stocks. That could reduce employee stress and make them happier. Non-stressed and happy employees tend to be more productive. Also given that Amazon is a retailer, a better paid workforce is likely to benefit them in that it either buys more goods from them or those increased earning help to cause waves that result in move money going towards non-amazon employees, who then buy more through amazon.
Also depending on how they do bonuses, do away with those and replacing them could be better for the bottom line in a less intuitive way.
If they actually base bonuses on merit, that means having to have someone track performance. Look at numbers and the figure out who gets a bonus and how much. They might not lay those people off because they could always have those people focus more on quality control and figure out where things are under performing. Granted they could cut those people and not have to have those positions around anymore.
Even if they do it the laziest way, there is probably still a certain level of number crunching and hour tracking. So again that's either human resources that could be refocused on something that does more for the bottom line or cut as a cost savings measure.
Plus, 15 dollars an hour is more reliable than either bonus or stocks. That could reduce employee stress and make them happier. Non-stressed and happy employees tend to be more productive. Also given that Amazon is a retailer, a better paid workforce is likely to benefit them in that it either buys more goods from them or those increased earning help to cause waves that result in move money going towards non-amazon employees, who then buy more through amazon.
Is this only in case on the lower class workers? Because I'm fairly sure Amazon's upper management has the typical bonus bullshit corporations have and unless I'm missing something I'm not seeing anything in the news about them losing benefits or lowered salaries.
edit: Bezos early for Amazon is getting the entire scary of an average worker every 10 seconds, there's absolutely no reason the average workers can't be properly compensated for their labor aside from greed.
Well, let’s put it this way: According to MONEY’s calculations, it takes him just under nine seconds to earn what Amazon’s median worker does in a year.
This revelation comes courtesy of a new federal rule that requires public companies to disclose the pay ratio between their employees and executives. It’s led to some shocking disclosures in recent weeks, and Amazon is no exception. The commerce giant confirmed in an SEC filing last month that its median worker — the person who makes more than half of the staff and less than half of the staff — earned $28,446 in 2017. For comparison, Bezos’ annual compensation last year was over $1.6 million.
No idea, how any of that impacts management (probably not). I actually work at a company, where most of the people are hourly and they do merit bonuses for a decent chunk of people. My employer is a medium sized company and they need at least 2-3 people putting in considerable time tracking and calculating that shit and that's with a setup that requires everyone to submit a time sheet of what the hell they did during the week. I'd imagine if Amazon did something like that, that would be a sizable chunk of people involved. Would probably still be a sizable chunk of people if they did the lazy way of "if we make X, then everyone that qualifies will get Y," because a smart company would still want to make sure the bonuses only go out to people that contributed, since they'll get cases where a division does really well and people get pissed when Joe, who is a shit employee that only work 3 days, gets the same bonus that everyone else did for the month/quarter.
ShadowenSnores in the morningLoserdomRegistered Userregular
edited October 2018
Also the whole thing is a smokescreen.
Because what a lot of people were most angry about, the people pissing in bottles instead of taking bathroom breaks and sleeping in cars and being run ragged for peanuts in all the "Amazon is basically a step up from slavery" articles? Those are all 1099 contractors and they are, apparently, not affected by this decision.
Because what a lot of people were most angry about, the people pissing in bottles instead of taking bathroom breaks and sleeping in cars and being run ragged for peanuts in all the "Amazon is basically a step up from slavery" articles? Those are all 1099 contractors and they are, apparently, not affected by this decision.
Source?
0
Options
ShadowenSnores in the morningLoserdomRegistered Userregular
The change, which will go into effect Nov. 1, will affect 250,000 workers with Amazon and Amazon-owned Whole Foods, the company said, including full-time, part-time, and seasonal employees, as well as those hired by temp agencies. The raise does not seem to effect independent contractors such as the Amazon Flex drivers who deliver packages from warehouses to your doorstep.
I have less solid information on the warehouse workers and so on being independent contractors.
The change, which will go into effect Nov. 1, will affect 250,000 workers with Amazon and Amazon-owned Whole Foods, the company said, including full-time, part-time, and seasonal employees, as well as those hired by temp agencies. The raise does not seem to effect independent contractors such as the Amazon Flex drivers who deliver packages from warehouses to your doorstep.
I have less solid information on the warehouse workers and so on being independent contractors.
The warehouse workers aren't 1099s.
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
Amazon's stock options were silly to begin with. They vest after 1-2 years of working for them. Most employees don't last that long. And the bonuses were based on how well you did based on the goals set by management. So lots of pee bottling is encouraged of course.
This is a net positive because there's a real good chance you weren't getting that $200 monthly bonus for being a top performing hub and you weren't staying long enough to vest the stock options. Which is still only a few hundred dollars.
Bonuses like that are kind of garbage benefits and don't really work IRL unless you're an upper management worker where they actually want to keep you because you bring a net benefit to the company and not just some cog they can drop in until they get their robots working. You also can't (shouldn't) budget around them either.
bowen on
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
They actually did something similar at the company I work for 4 years ago just after I started, previously every employee has a bonus but as things tanked they did something that for me personally was completely fine. They took your total possible bonus, divided it by 2 and added that to your base salary. That worked fine for me as I had been in Education before that and there was no such thing as bonuses. I got the first one this year after being moved into management, and while I am certainly happy to get more money thrown at me I'd rather have the certainty of it showing up on the pay cheque even if it's less.
Of course with Amazon, I assume they did something shitty to balance it out, like organ harvesting or something.
While initially reporting on the video, Gizmodo reached out to Amazon for comment repeatedly and was rebuffed, only receiving comment after publication of our story that accused us of “cherry picking” quotes from the training video. We asked the company to provide the full footage of the video, so that the anonymity of our source would be maintained. We received no reply. Now both senators are asking that Amazon, “provide the full video, and its written script, reported by Gizmodo on September 26, 2018" and as well as “any other materials distributed to Whole Foods ‘team leaders’ relevant to organizing activities, or ‘warning signs’ of such activities.”
THE NATIONAL BORDER Patrol Council, the union representing Border Patrol agents across the country, is featured in a new video that includes white nationalists and anti-Muslim extremists. The video, titled “Killing Free Speech,” was endorsed by the union and recently shown by agents at a private screening in San Diego. The video is also expected to be shown in Texas, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C., according to union representative Terence Shigg, president of the San Diego chapter of the NBPC.
The nearly hour-and-half-long video refers to Democrats as “dark and evil” and features a bevy of American and European far-right, anti-Muslim white nationalists who make a correlation between gang rapes, Islam, and immigration. The documentary also features members of the Proud Boys, a hate group designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center, that often aligns with white nationalists and are known for being misogynists and anti-Muslim.
...
In a press release, the NBPC describes “Killing Free Speech” as a “powerful spotlight on the terrifying assault on liberty in America today. A country heading down the road toward Orwellian control of information by a small but powerful cabal.” The release also invites viewers of the video to “dissect the daily propaganda used by the mainstream media who will stop at nothing to mislead the public and discredit and demonize those who risk their lives protecting America’s borders.”
THE NATIONAL BORDER Patrol Council, the union representing Border Patrol agents across the country, is featured in a new video that includes white nationalists and anti-Muslim extremists. The video, titled “Killing Free Speech,” was endorsed by the union and recently shown by agents at a private screening in San Diego. The video is also expected to be shown in Texas, Los Angeles, and Washington, D.C., according to union representative Terence Shigg, president of the San Diego chapter of the NBPC.
The nearly hour-and-half-long video refers to Democrats as “dark and evil” and features a bevy of American and European far-right, anti-Muslim white nationalists who make a correlation between gang rapes, Islam, and immigration. The documentary also features members of the Proud Boys, a hate group designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center, that often aligns with white nationalists and are known for being misogynists and anti-Muslim.
...
In a press release, the NBPC describes “Killing Free Speech” as a “powerful spotlight on the terrifying assault on liberty in America today. A country heading down the road toward Orwellian control of information by a small but powerful cabal.” The release also invites viewers of the video to “dissect the daily propaganda used by the mainstream media who will stop at nothing to mislead the public and discredit and demonize those who risk their lives protecting America’s borders.”
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
edited December 2018
Here's another teachers' union strike that I guess went under the radar (or I just missed it because of other stuff going on): this time it's charter school teachers in Chicago. They were seeking higher pay and smaller class sizes, among other concessions, and have succeeded. Teacher strikes work. Not much time left in this year but I hope there are more next year as needed.
Here's another teachers' union strike that I guess went under the radar (or I just missed it because of other stuff going on): this time it's charter school teachers in Chicago. They were seeking higher pay and smaller class sizes, among other concessions, and have succeeded. Teacher strikes work. Not much time left in this year but I hope there are more next year as needed.
Yup. As long as it's made clear what they're fighting for, and exposing just how shit their lives are, they usually get massive support.
I wish they didn't have to get to the point of desperation, and then be forced to strike, to get movement toward what they should be owed (both in terms of reasonable working conditions and better pay), but that's where we are. And it f'n sucks.
I considered going into teaching, but decided against it. Took a job in security. Less stress. Less unpaid work. Less dealing with assholes. And no crippling debt before my first day on the job.
Here's another teachers' union strike that I guess went under the radar (or I just missed it because of other stuff going on): this time it's charter school teachers in Chicago. They were seeking higher pay and smaller class sizes, among other concessions, and have succeeded. Teacher strikes work. Not much time left in this year but I hope there are more next year as needed.
That's the first charter school teacher strike, at least that I'm aware of. And given that the entire point of charters is to break the unions, an interesting development.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Posts
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
We're not against unions, but we will imply that you will not be making an union's here if you want a pay check.
The video is gone now, it seems. But I will say that it doesn't seem any more harsh than the one I watched while working for Shaw's/Supervalu.
Not that it makes it ok, just standard practice. Which is bad.
Well,,,,,
That's what comes from wanting things, peasants.
Edit: not that those things should be taken away.
However, I'm pretty sure Amazon has done maths and found that paying their workers more and cutting the bonuses saves them money.
I wouldn't count on that, at least as a direct equation, though it's entirely possible as a side benefit. The workers might actually be better off, and the cutting of bonuses just helps Amazon subsidize things.
What it DOES do, is get people off their back, both socially and legislatively, and that might mean a better stock price and/or revenues in the long term.
When you've got a shitty reputation for exploitation, people aren't as happy to give you money. Nike stock took a dive when the child labor shit came to light. Maybe Amazon is wanting to getting ahead of this, as cheaply as possible.
Still craven, but can't expect corporations to give a shit in our current economy. Hope? Sure. Expect? Nope.
It sucks that they aren't getting even more of a benefit from all of this, but it still looks like a real benefit in most cases, and without the strings attached.
If they actually base bonuses on merit, that means having to have someone track performance. Look at numbers and the figure out who gets a bonus and how much. They might not lay those people off because they could always have those people focus more on quality control and figure out where things are under performing. Granted they could cut those people and not have to have those positions around anymore.
Even if they do it the laziest way, there is probably still a certain level of number crunching and hour tracking. So again that's either human resources that could be refocused on something that does more for the bottom line or cut as a cost savings measure.
Plus, 15 dollars an hour is more reliable than either bonus or stocks. That could reduce employee stress and make them happier. Non-stressed and happy employees tend to be more productive. Also given that Amazon is a retailer, a better paid workforce is likely to benefit them in that it either buys more goods from them or those increased earning help to cause waves that result in move money going towards non-amazon employees, who then buy more through amazon.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
Is this only in case on the lower class workers? Because I'm fairly sure Amazon's upper management has the typical bonus bullshit corporations have and unless I'm missing something I'm not seeing anything in the news about them losing benefits or lowered salaries.
edit: Bezos early for Amazon is getting the entire scary of an average worker every 10 seconds, there's absolutely no reason the average workers can't be properly compensated for their labor aside from greed.
http://time.com/money/5262923/amazon-employee-median-salary-jeff-bezos/
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
Because what a lot of people were most angry about, the people pissing in bottles instead of taking bathroom breaks and sleeping in cars and being run ragged for peanuts in all the "Amazon is basically a step up from slavery" articles? Those are all 1099 contractors and they are, apparently, not affected by this decision.
Source?
I have less solid information on the warehouse workers and so on being independent contractors.
The warehouse workers aren't 1099s.
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
This is a net positive because there's a real good chance you weren't getting that $200 monthly bonus for being a top performing hub and you weren't staying long enough to vest the stock options. Which is still only a few hundred dollars.
Bonuses like that are kind of garbage benefits and don't really work IRL unless you're an upper management worker where they actually want to keep you because you bring a net benefit to the company and not just some cog they can drop in until they get their robots working. You also can't (shouldn't) budget around them either.
Of course with Amazon, I assume they did something shitty to balance it out, like organ harvesting or something.
The fact that this is the standard response to giving people a raise is a good demonstration that they really needed to do this.
The irony on that last part is amazing.
It's meta propaganda.
MWO: Adamski
This may not be the face-stomping, but it seems to be tying the laces of the boot.
I awesomed this, but I needed to awesome it again.
There are worse politicians. There are worse governors (Georgia and Florida are looking to be).
But Scott Walker has been a fucking canker sore on a relatively blueish state for WAY too long.
Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
WA just voted to curtail cop legal immunity.
Yup. As long as it's made clear what they're fighting for, and exposing just how shit their lives are, they usually get massive support.
I wish they didn't have to get to the point of desperation, and then be forced to strike, to get movement toward what they should be owed (both in terms of reasonable working conditions and better pay), but that's where we are. And it f'n sucks.
I considered going into teaching, but decided against it. Took a job in security. Less stress. Less unpaid work. Less dealing with assholes. And no crippling debt before my first day on the job.
Probably 'Employee of the month' style bonuses.
An annual bonus wouldn't convince me to piss in a bottle, for example.
That's the first charter school teacher strike, at least that I'm aware of. And given that the entire point of charters is to break the unions, an interesting development.