GMB launches legal action against 'out of control' Amazon at Coventry warehouse
theguardian.com
theguardian.com
To comment on quality: Amazon software divisions have very few QAs per developer compared to many other large software corporations. This doesn't really mean they test less, it just means their developers are tasked more with testing. And... they don't like it. Frankly, we've developed s/w development culture in which QA is relegated to people with less ability and less aptitude. Most developers would be afraid of their resume mentioning a QA position, as that would imply some sort of deficiency. So, the reason isn't really the lack of testing or even as you suggested, talent retention (Google does even worse than AWS at this, for example), it's low morale.
Also, when Amazon first came to Israel, for example, they didn't just offer competitive compensation, they beat everyone, even very high-paying places by something like 25%. It took petitioning them and signatures of a lot of local / international companies to get them to tone it down, as they would've disrupted local job market substantially and have a lot of local employers in a pickle. So, at least, on this front, Amazon invests into talent.
From yet another perspective: Amazon, from the inside, looks more like a typical US s/w company. That is, lots of red tape, IT department that's trying to make developers' life miserable. Rigid hierarchy. Orders come from above, feedback never propagates back to the management. In other words: they pay a lot, but want you to shut up and do what you are told, don't get creative, don't challenge the PRD, or you might not do so well in the yearly review.
They need reminding that testing != QA.
How does a generic link generate an email that cancel the membership of a specific person ? Or do they have personalized links all around, but then why don't just call those link ? There is something I am missing
(My guess is that it could be a link that opens a web page that deceive the person into canceling the membership, but it is not what is described here)
mailto:membership@gmb.union?bcc=hr@amazon.uk&subject=Please%20cancel%20my%20union%20membership&body=I%20have%20decided%20I%20wish%20to%20participate%20in%20the%20free%20market%20as%20in%20independent%20economic%20entity%20like%20god%20intended%2C%20please%20immediately%20cancel%20my%20membership%20and%20remove%20me%20from%20the%20rosterI wish the article had used clear language like "pre-filled" or "sends", since it could mean either, and those are very different levels of scumbaggery.
Disagreed. It is unambiguous and false - I'll bet.
It merely opens and fills a Compose window.
(emphasis mine)
I don't think this is that unclear. Scan and then a single tap on “Send”.
A genuine question - can't people simply stand up and vote for better employer with their feet? Amazon ain't some 200-year old business that whole generations of towns evolved around with no other option in sight. Even then this should always be an option unless you live in some communist (eh) dictatorship.
Surely not even this union is dumb enough to think the workers can control the owners.
The difficulty that the amazon workers face is that they turn up and a screen says pick up these things from these boxes and take them over there, put them in other boxes, stick postage labels on and put it in the back of the truck. It doesn't take much training to do, so workers who unionise are very vulnerable to being fired until enough have joined the union to hold an effective strike.
Unions are always going to naturally form in a pure libertarian society where the only rules are freedom of contract. Usually they are restricted by government regulation.
For example, libertarians do not believe people have a right to food or shelter. You only have a right to keep and use your body and your property.
for example, if you have a scarcity of labor, then labor sets the terms. AI architects could form a union any day they want, they just dont want to.
If you don't like it, you can't pick or make another.
By us law, you are usually allowed to quit the union, if you do, you still have to pay the union part of your salary.
In the US, workers can't join or start a union unless 51% of all workers vote to join them/let them.
If all this sounds crazy, polarizing, and like a recipe for conflict, you are correct. I think the European versions of unions makes much more sense, and are closer to free association
A myth. Employee has leverage.
If AMZN is a $2T company and has 1.5M employees, every worker can become a millionaire if they just do this one simple trick. Why don't they?
I'm also confused about what role you think investors should play in business if money is unimportant. What would YCombinator look like? A bank that just loans out money for a fixed interest rate?
A dude called Karl wrote a book that answers this.
In my libertarian-socialist days, I have actually gave some thought to this question. The best I could come up with was 1) variable return lending or 2) profit sharing agreements with a sunset duration.
Both seem like a more expensive option for companies in an environment with economic growth. The beauty about selling stock/corporate ownership is that you never have to pay your investors a dime as long as the company has growth prospects. The return for investors simply comes from sale to other investors.
When a company issues a bond or makes a profit sharing agreement, they actually have to pay that back. Maybe in a growth environment, they could perpetually use new loans to pay old debt, but this would put them at the mercy of the outside lending rate.
By way of example, instead YC buying 20% of a company, it could receive the rights to sell a 20-year contract for 20% of the company profit.