Slashdot Mirror


Amazon Offers To Help Train Workers For Other Jobs

itwbennett writes "Amazon, which has come under attack for harsh warehouse working conditions, on Monday announced a new training benefit program for fulfillment center employees. The program will cover 95% of the cost of vocational training for jobs that Amazon determined to be in high demand and that pay relatively well, including aircraft mechanics, computer-aided design, machine tool technology, medical laboratory science and nursing." Two limitations of note: the maximum Amazon will contribute is $2,000/year for four years, and the employees need to have worked full-time for three consecutive years before they can take advantage of the program.

148 comments

  1. Of course they don't have to keep you employed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Really, nothing stopping them from temp employees being tossed.

    1. Re:Of course they don't have to keep you employed by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 0

      If experience isn't benefit, what's stopping that from happening anyway?

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:Of course they don't have to keep you employed by TheLink · · Score: 2

      Not much except potential backlash from human customers. Amazon still depends on very many human customers. So they have to boil the frog slowly and carefully.

      They're not far from being able to get rid of most human workers in their warehouses:
      http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/123765-automation-warehouse-robots-come-of-age-as-amazon-buys-kiva/3

      You don't need that much brains to do this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWNuaPE4DTc
      So a more fancy pick-n-place robot could replace the human in that job.

      --
  2. Yikes... by SomePgmr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Three full years in an Amazon.com warehouse? From the stories, that sounds like a death sentence.

    1. Re:Yikes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try seven to get the full benefit.

    2. Re:Yikes... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 0

      6 months would have been more fair; generous, even.

      3 years is absurd!

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    3. Re:Yikes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What do you expect Amazon to do? Give a free full ride to anyone who asks? In order to stay in business, amazon must turn a profit, and in order to do that, it must maintain a level of productive throughput at an affordable price.

      Sure, the work sucks, but it is the work that customers are willing to pay for. Sure, it takes three years before the education options become available, but were it not for this offer, people who can't find any better-paying work would only have lifelong debt as their alternative.

      The only thing forcing Amazon to do this at all is public sentiment. If you don't think it is enough, feel free to tell Amazon that as you boycott them.

    4. Re:Yikes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I think what most people would "expect Amazon to do" would be to act a bit more humane, even if the prices were slightly higher (even by US$5 or $10 for inexpensive items). I would recommend everyone considering responding similar to how you have to read this story by a reporter who worked there to find out what the working conditions on a daily basis were actually like:

      http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/mac-mcclelland-free-online-shipping-warehouses-labor

      I hope that after reading the story, you too would agree that less gruelling working conditions would be more ideal overall even if it meant slightly higher prices. I surely can't be the only one who feels comfortable paying a bit more for something knowing that the people getting my order together aren't being treated like dogshit.

    5. Re:Yikes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If Amazon improves working conditions and/or pays more, and must charge more to cover the costs, then competitors like walmart, sears, target, etc can suddenly start undercutting Amazon in price. Of course, they will do so by having the same low-waged working situation that Amazon does now.

      In order to compete against them despite the higher prices, Amazon will basically have to convince droves of potential customers to buy humanitarianism along with their products. Do you think they can pull that off?

      Maybe a few noble souls are like you, and don't mind paying more. The majority of people are too ignorant to know the difference, or too apathetic to care, and just buy cheap.

      If you can figure out how to make the masses care (and act), you could accomplish a whole lot more than the improving of working conditions at Amazon.

    6. Re:Yikes... by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      What I expect them to do is this - have an education benefit for their employees, or not, it's their business, but before going off tooting about how great it is, maybe look at just how far that education benefit actually goes in the current education market, and what other companies who have education benefits are doing.

      $2k per year? If that was per semester, I'd still expect them to avoid making a big announcement to the press.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    7. Re:Yikes... by c0lo · · Score: 1

      I think what most people would "expect Amazon to do" would be to act a bit more humane,

      Huh? It would break a too high number of rules (try 144, 211, 261, 284, 285 and numerous unlisted others).

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    8. Re:Yikes... by datavirtue · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Philosophy doesn't work on the pocketbook over the whole economy. People buy the cheapest available equivalent product, period. I always chuckle when I see "buy local" signs because it is such a naive idea that is completely detached from reality. How do I know that when buying local that I'm really creating any benefit? I find it silly to adjust my spending based on something that is not rooted in obvious economic value. If you want better treatment for workers there are two possibilities: unions or government regulation. The government union/regulation introduces the economic incentive to act in the interests of the workers.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    9. Re:Yikes... by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      They are removing a portion of the burden from government which is the point of all of this. Normally, the government would use a Pell grant to pay for a vocational training program. This slices a big portion off of the (sorry, our) government's expense in those cases. They don't mention time off for the training do they? This is a blatant attempt to head off government regulation. The Healthcare bill has set a compulsion precedent that is probably going to address education soon. Notice, Obama just made a move to allow bankruptcies for private sector education loans (which total 10% of debt, the government ed loans--90%--are non-voidable).

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    10. Re:Yikes... by blackraven14250 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Bush took away the ability for student loans to be discharged during bankruptcy in 2005, and that move has been criticized heavily since then. Discharging student loan debt isn't some grand new concept - it's going back to the way things were before some idiot fucked it up.

    11. Re:Yikes... by ultranova · · Score: 1

      What do you expect Amazon to do?

      Anything and everything it can get away with. It's a corporation, it has no capability for conscience or empathy.

      Give a free full ride to anyone who asks?

      Sure, why not? That has worked perfectly fine wherever it has been tried, with the Nordic welfare countries being perhaps the most triumphant example. It turns out that in a reasonably healthy culture the slackers will ultimately consume little (lacking the ambition for truly epic leeching schemes) so those who use the opportunity of free education to reach for the stars more than make up for them.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    12. Re:Yikes... by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      erm After 3 months you would consider paying your employees to learn skills needed to leave your service?

      At this point you wouldn't even have covered the cost of training let alone the cost of hiring new employees, and you're already ensuring that they will have a very short tenure with you.

      Reasonable and generous? Hell I've never heard of someone being paid to learn something unrelated to their current career by their current employer.

    13. Re:Yikes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Federal student loan debt was almost never dischargeable. The 2005 change moved _private_ loans into the non-dischargeable category. I believe that's right around the same time that the private sector picked up on student loans.

    14. Re:Yikes... by datavirtue · · Score: 1

      Thanks for posting this. I had no idea what was going on as I had a sterile automated Amazon fantasy land in my head. I'm truly appalled at this and it makes me want to stop buying anything. This makes me sick.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    15. Re:Yikes... by rtfa-troll · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I will agree with your comment that government involvement, however imperfect, is probably needed. A free market requires full information and it is almost impossible for people to understand how things are produced without somebody outside the companies following up, checking and ensuring that information gets from the production to the consumer. Unfortunately, the current situation is that the people in government are of the "government is for the companies" or "government doesn't work" persuasion and are setting out to prove it. Food labelling means that something which is labelled as "strawberry flavour yoghurt" can have nothing to do with strawberries. At one point the US government was trying to make it impossible to label meat as growth hormone free. For now at least you need to do something yourself. If nothing else so that some of the small, traditional or careful producers continue to exist when / if your government wakes up. Look at how fat most Americans are; understand most nations are catching up. That is, at least partly, the effect of eating crap. Eat better food and it will be better for you.

      [...] People buy the cheapest available equivalent product, period. I always chuckle when I see "buy local" signs because it is such a naive idea that is completely detached from reality. How do I know that when buying local that I'm really creating any benefit? I find it silly to adjust my spending based on something that is not rooted in obvious economic value.[...]

      No; you buy the cheapest available product; I buy local sometimes. Most importantly, I try to buy conciously most of the stuff that I buy. Learn about the products where you can. How do you know you are creating benefit? Go and visit the farm. Seriously. Almost any small producer will be happy to show you around. They will explain many things. Small farms in many countries often have accommodation ("agrotourism") as a side line. Spend a couple of days staying there, seeing what they do. When you know your farmer personally you will be much more likely to trust him.

      For some things local just isn't relevant. When you buy products with the real Fair Trade logo then you can be pretty sure it's better than the alternative. Partly this is better for the farmers. Also the certification includes production standards which are likely better for you. Just beware that there are some fake Fair Trade style groups (the "Rainforest Alliance" and "Fair Trade USA" and so on) which you should only buy when there is no alternative.

      How about for example toys? Everybody keeps complaining about how terrible "Chinese" plastic toys are. Then they complain when there is a recall with lead paint. Tell your friends and especially family that you don't accept cheap plastic toys. Buy Lego. They have completely different levels of product safety. The quality is also better; you will still find your kid playing with stuff five years later where normal toys seem to last about a week.

      Basically, what I'm saying: there are economic factors you don't see. Products which make you sick cost you money, it's just that you don't directly see the link. Products which pay their workers more mean your company gets more business; again, this is hard to see but it's a real "economic" factor. "Local" is a useful way to guess that something has them. Specific producers with a brand, a reputation and an interest in quality are another way. Specific labels are yet another way. Try to look not just at the price but the broader economic picture. Think about what hidden costs to you are included in any product and choose the best product.

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    16. Re:Yikes... by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      Then you have to contend with people for whom Amazon would become ridiculously expensive if they upped the prices any more. We already pay $13USD shipping on a fucking book thank-you-very-much, no they damn well may not raise prices.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    17. Re:Yikes... by stephanruby · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What do you expect Amazon to do? Give a free full ride to anyone who asks?

      But that's the thing, their temps didn't ask for a full ride, nor did they ask for extra training. They only asked for the dock doors to be opened so they get could get some ventilation in.

      So not only, Amazon didn't respond to the issue at hand, the fact that their people are getting heat strokes. They're not even addressing the right people. It's not their "full-time employees" that are getting heat strokes, it's mostly their temporary employees that are getting them because it's their temps that are the most vulnerable in the company.

      And not only, are they not addressing the main complaint that managers are routinely bullying their employees during the height of their heat strokes to sign papers saying that the root cause of their heat strokes are not work-related, but now they're trying to regurgitate those same manufactured statistics back to the public -- in the form of even vaguer comparisons -- as if they had not even read the original complaints against them.

      What the hell are their PR people doing? Are they so out of touch? There are a thousand ways the company could have responded better to these criticisms.

    18. Re:Yikes... by serviscope_minor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I always chuckle when I see "buy local" signs because it is such a naive idea that is completely detached from reality. How do I know that when buying local that I'm really creating any benefit?

      Seems like a cynical view to me, and almost certainly incorrect. I often buy local if I can, for various definitions of local.

      I tend to buy local (same county) for bread, flour, beer (often), cider (occasionally--I don't drink much) and a few other things where possible. The products are frequently fresher/better/more unique and interesting first, and secondly, I happen to like living somewhere where not everything is homogonised into a few very large national brands.

      I buy fruit and veg local if possible, frmo my home country next and wider Europe next. I try to avoid buying much from further afield. The benefits are that actually, if you restrict yourself to seasonal stuff it tends to be better and it just seems wasteful to eat asparagus air-freighted from Peru.

      It means I also have a smaller environmental impact and support local and regional businesses.

      I also avoid Tesco and Sainsbury's because they're evil, and I let the presence of independent shops and other supermarkets influence my decision on where to move house to.

      There's not point in complaining about such things going bad if one isn't prepared to do something about it.

      If you don't act on them, then principles are merely fond notions.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    19. Re:Yikes... by rmstar · · Score: 1

      What do you expect Amazon to do? Give a free full ride to anyone who asks? In order to stay in business, amazon must turn a profit, and in order to do that, it must maintain a level of productive throughput at an affordable price.

      Yes. So what Amazon should do is to lobby for a law that regulates this type of work. If everyone who does retail has to treat their packbots in the same way, there is no advantage in mistreating them, and the race to the bottom is stopped. Competition can then move to something else.

      That's a no-brainer, really. That is the way it works in civilized countries. This, however, is what happens in uncivilized countries.

    20. Re:Yikes... by RaceProUK · · Score: 2

      $13USD shipping

      Then select a cheaper shipping option.

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    21. Re:Yikes... by dkleinsc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sure, the work sucks, but it is the work that customers are willing to pay for.

      Probably not. If Amazon is like most companies, if you doubled the money spent on all hourly workers (either doubling wages, or spending money on improved working conditions, or hiring more workers, etc) involved in the product, it would probably make a difference of maybe $0.20 per item (I can't provide exact estimates here since Amazon refuses to tell anyone how many workers they have, but that's not an unreasonable guess). The effects of this would probably amount to each item being on average $0.10 more expensive, while EPS might be down $0.01 to account for the other $0.10.

      The real story is this: It's possible to make decent money while paying and treating your work force well, and many companies do just that. It's possible to make more money while paying your work force peanuts and treating them like crap. Wall St and upper management don't care about whether they're people end up sick or injured or dead because of poor working conditions so long as (a) there are a bunch of desperate unemployed people to hire, and (b) the cost of doing something to improve things is greater than the cost of the lawsuits, fines, and workers comp premium changes. The difference between the profitability of good guys versus bad guys is built on the backs of lives destroyed. Could you sleep at night knowing you made lots of money by inflicting human suffering on other people?

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    22. Re:Yikes... by danbert8 · · Score: 2

      But dear lord, do you know what UPS workers have to put up with? I can't imagine they are paid much more than the Amazon workers... So you are saying you should pay more for Amazon to treat their employers better, but screw those damn UPS workers, pay them at little as you can.

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    23. Re:Yikes... by RaceProUK · · Score: 1

      Who said anything about UPS? I suggested a cheaper shipping option. That's got nothing to do with the courier. Super Saver delivery in the UK is handled by Royal Mail, but if you want it quicker, then you pay for a dedicated courier service like Parcelforce or TNT. I can't see why the same can't work in the US e.g. Super Saver delivery is handled by USPS, but if you want it quicker, then you pay for UPS or FedEx.

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    24. Re:Yikes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yikes is right.

      As a business owner, I can't imagine offering such a program for my warehouse workers. After paying salaries, taxes, insurance, unemployment insurance, and vacations, Christmas bonuses, my warehouse workers are a high cost against already low margin sales.

      Now, add $2,000 to each worker of 3 years or more. That's equivalent to a ~10% salary increase and I'm still expected to provide further salary increases for cost of living, tenure and performance. But, people here still piss all over Amazon's offer like it's an insult! Have any of you run a business? Competition is plentiful and profit is hard to achieve.

    25. Re:Yikes... by Chibi+Merrow · · Score: 2

      It means I also have a smaller environmental impact

      That's actually up for debate. Transportation costs are only a small fraction of the environmental effect of agriculture, and spreading farming out into lots of smaller, less-efficient operations doesn't necessarily reduce transportation costs.

      There's actually a lot of potential problems with the "buy local" movement... Freakanomics wrote an article about it last year, for instance.

      That being said, if you PREFER local products (I think the Sausage at my local farmer's market is a lot closer to the sausage I grew up with than the stuff in Supermarkets, for instance), then by all means buy them. But don't do so because you assume what you're doing is somehow morally, ethically, fiscally, or environmentally better... In the grand scheme of things, chances are it's not.

      --
      Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
      Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
    26. Re:Yikes... by zarthrag · · Score: 1

      Actually, poor working conditions can make you even more money

      --
      Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
    27. Re:Yikes... by BVis · · Score: 2, Interesting

      After paying salaries, taxes, insurance, unemployment insurance, and vacations, Christmas bonuses, my warehouse workers are a high cost against already low margin sales.

      This assumes you're hiring permanent employees. I'm assuming that you are not based in the USA.

      Salaries - N/A. You cut a check to the temp agency and they pay THEIR employee. Since they take their cut, there is that much less to pay the worker.

      Taxes - 100% of what you pay a temp agency is deductible as a 'business expense'. You don't even have to worry about payroll taxes or paying into that annoying socialist un-American terrorist program called Social Security, either; the temp agency manages that.

      Insurance - Temp employees don't get insurance, apart from what they're entitled to by law. This usually means worker's comp and nothing else. No life insurance, no short- or long- term disability, and DEFINITELY no health insurance.

      Unemployment insurance - The temp agencies pay as little as possible into the pool. This means that every claim gets fought. Temp agencies are notorious for going into these hearings and telling bald-faced lies, because they know that the ex-worker won't be able to prove otherwise. Or, before the worker can file a claim, they offer them an assignment that is either blatantly illegal or they physically cannot accept due to massive safety issues or those pesky 'laws of physics' that prevent you from showing up for an assignment that starts in 20 minutes, when you're 30 minutes away from the location. Then, at the hearing, they'll be able to (technically correctly) argue that you turned down an assignment and therefore voluntarily quit.

      Vacations - Temp employees don't get vacation days. Or any other paid time off. You want a sick day? You're fired. You come in anyway, even though you're so sick you can't do your job? You're fired. Your child dies in an auto accident and you want to go to the funeral? You're fired. You're in an auto accident and are in the hospital with three broken limbs? After you go bankrupt because you can't pay the hospital bill (because of course, you have no health insurance), you're fired.

      Christmas bonuses - That's the funniest thing I've heard all week. NOBODY in the USA gets ANY KIND of bonus anymore, unless you're a C-level executive at a big company, in which case you can get a bonus for keeping expenses down (for example, creating an atmosphere in which you can pay the temp agencies as little as possible, since they're desperate for clients.)

      Exacerbating the problem is the fact that it's 100% legal for your employer to turn to you and say "OK, you're fired, if you want to keep working here, call this temp agency." The company being able to get the same work for less pay is a good enough reason to fire someone, especially in low-skill jobs like warehouse work (since it costs next to nothing to hire a replacement). Technically, since most states are at-will employment states, they don't even need the slightest pretense to fire you. I have literally been told, to my face, when I asked why I was being fired, "We don't have to tell you."

      --
      Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
    28. Re:Yikes... by Life2Death · · Score: 1

      Ha! I try to support local vendors and growers. For farmers markets and the like, I cant recommend anyone else. As for other local shops and the like, they charge more (computer repair/parts, auto, tools, groceries) for less value. What I mean is that they are equal or less in quality, and their service is usually mean and or non caring like they dont need my money or desire to help me to make extra sales. I was flat out told that I "dont need a new computer" when he had no idea what for (a media center, new addition) and I responded by saying I guess what you dont need is money and left.

    29. Re:Yikes... by tjb · · Score: 1

      NOBODY in the USA gets ANY KIND of bonus anymore, unless you're a C-level executive at a big company

      That is completely untrue.

    30. Re:Yikes... by danbert8 · · Score: 1

      I was trying to make a point by indicating that shipping companies' warehousing jobs are probably no better than Amazon's warehouse jobs. If you are willing to pay more to give Amazon's warehouse workers a better deal, then why would you try to cheap out on the shipping option?

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    31. Re:Yikes... by Bodero · · Score: 1

      Amazon has already rolled out a $52 million plan to install air conditioning at their warehouses.

    32. Re:Yikes... by BVis · · Score: 1

      True of most people who do actual work for a living, not executives who leech off the productive work of others.

      --
      Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
    33. Re:Yikes... by RaceProUK · · Score: 1

      Good luck with your crusade to make everyone pay exhorbitant shipping fees where regular mail will suffice.

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    34. Re:Yikes... by danbert8 · · Score: 1

      Well good luck with getting people to pay exorbitant worker salaries to warehousing labor where cheap temporary laborers will suffice. Also that Super Saver shipping by the USPS sure isn't making the postal service any money... http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/310002/usps-prepares-default-reform-stalls-robert-verbruggen

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    35. Re:Yikes... by RaceProUK · · Score: 1

      Of course, cheap postage is why postal services are losing money. It's got nothing to do with beaurocratic corruption at all.

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    36. Re:Yikes... by lessthan · · Score: 2

      to buy humanitarianism along with their products.

      You know, that is an awesome idea. Make it an optional charity thing like McDonald's does. At the check-out page have a box saying "Do you want to contribute to the Amazon Education fund?" At worst, it would produce some interesting statistics about generosity.

        And before I see anyone else do it, I'll bring up unions. This is why they were spread across an entire occupation. That way, no matter where a company went to hire a professional 'X', the company would have to pay the same. To offer lower prices, the company would have to focus on making their processes cheaper, rather than come up with more creative ways to screw their employees. (I say more creative, but it always comes down to more work for less pay.)

      --
      Space Shuttle was a program that strapped humans to an explosion and tried to stab through the sky with fire and math
    37. Re:Yikes... by lessthan · · Score: 1

      Without a single example to prove otherwise. LOL

      --
      Space Shuttle was a program that strapped humans to an explosion and tried to stab through the sky with fire and math
    38. Re:Yikes... by Kalriath · · Score: 1

      There are no cheaper shipping options.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    39. Re:Yikes... by lgw · · Score: 1

      All employers should pay as little as they possibly can. All employees should demand as much as they possibly can. That may sound harsh, but the result is that people have a strong incentive to work where society finds the most benefit from one more worker - and the benefit from that is immense. (Working conditions may be a different story, which is apparantly the main complaint against Amazon, but that's separate from wages.) And employers are stongly incented to find cheaper ways to make products, which benefits everyone.

      What people keep missing is that the number of dollars (or whatever) you get paid isn't what's meaningful, but what those dollars can buy. The entire industrial revolution was an object lesson that workers lives improve remarkably because everyday stuff gets cheaper. There's a multiplier effect that benefits everyone from making stuff cheaply, and you really do come out ahead on the deal.

      But maybe you have a better plan? Perhaps a central planning committee could decide for each company what a reasonable profit was? What a reasonable wage for workers was? What reasonable prices were? That has proven to be a quite reliable recipe for corruption, starvation, waste, spoilage, and deprivation.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    40. Re:Yikes... by lgw · · Score: 1

      Vacations - Temp employees don't get vacation days. Or any other paid time off. You want a sick day? You're fired. You come in anyway, even though you're so sick you can't do your job? You're fired. Your child dies in an auto accident and you want to go to the funeral? You're fired. You're in an auto accident and are in the hospital with three broken limbs? After you go bankrupt because you can't pay the hospital bill (because of course, you have no health insurance), you're fired.

      None of this has been true for the temp employees I've overseen. It sounds completely made up to me. Unless you're talking about unskilled labor where much of that is normal for everyone?

      NOBODY in the USA gets ANY KIND of bonus anymore, unless you're a C-level executive at a big company, in which case you can get a bonus for keeping expenses down (for example, creating an atmosphere in which you can pay the temp agencies as little as possible, since they're desperate for clients.)

      I've never been a C-level anything (except perhaps student) and I've gotten bonuses most every year for the past 15 years - sometimes unexpected and quite large bonuses. You seem to just be making all of this stuff up. I suspect you read it all somewhere and found it convincing.

      I have literally been told, to my face, when I asked why I was being fired, "We don't have to tell you."

      It's usually better not to, as it invites lawsuit. Especially if you're firing someone for being a jerk, and generally making stuff up all day. You have to tell someone only if you fire them for cause (therby denying them unemplyment compensation), which is very rare to do even in deserving cases because you're so likely to get sued. Typically only businesses small enough that they've never been sued by an ex-employee will fire someone for cause.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    41. Re:Yikes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      None of this has been true for the temp employees I've overseen. It sounds completely made up to me. Unless you're talking about unskilled labor where much of that is normal for everyone?

      Nope. Unless you consider desktop migration and support to be "unskilled". No vacation pay, no days off, no exceptions, no kidding.

      NOBODY in the USA gets ANY KIND of bonus anymore, unless you're a C-level executive at a big company, in which case you can get a bonus for keeping expenses down (for example, creating an atmosphere in which you can pay the temp agencies as little as possible, since they're desperate for clients.)

      I've never been a C-level anything (except perhaps student) and I've gotten bonuses most every year for the past 15 years - sometimes unexpected and quite large bonuses. You seem to just be making all of this stuff up. I suspect you read it all somewhere and found it convincing.

      If that's what helps you sleep at night, I guess. I spent a fair amount of time working as a temp (apparently I was slow to learn just how hard people will fuck you over for a buck) and I can tell you from first-hand experience that this shit goes on all the time.

      It's usually better not to, as it invites lawsuit. Especially if you're firing someone for being a jerk, and generally making stuff up all day. You have to tell someone only if you fire them for cause (therby denying them unemplyment compensation), which is very rare to do even in deserving cases because you're so likely to get sued. Typically only businesses small enough that they've never been sued by an ex-employee will fire someone for cause.

      Nope. Businesses in at-will employment states never have to give a reason for termination. The only time that it would be an issue is if they fight an unemployment claim, at which point they'll make up something that can't be refuted (like some mealy-mouthed crap about "performance issues" that had never been discussed previously, or "excessive tardiness" in the form of the one day there was a pileup on the highway and you were five minutes late, or the classic "poor fit for the assignment" that means exactly nothing). Temp agencies don't even have to do that, they can just say "the assignment ended" and that's the end of the discussion.

      Oh sure, technically you could sue if you think you've been dismissed illegally. Good luck proving it. (And that's only if you can convince a lawyer to take your case in the first place.)

  3. NYT: Self-Congratulatory Move by Amazon? by theodp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    An Amazon Education: "Sucharita Mulpuru, the retail analyst for Forrester Research, was unimpressed. "It seemed self-congratulatory," she said in an interview. "Most companies, when they treat their workers well, that's just what they do. They don't say, "This is a reason you should do business with us.'"

    1. Re:NYT: Self-Congratulatory Move by Amazon? by game+kid · · Score: 1

      I guess that analyst's check still needs to clear, unlike another...

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
  4. Wow! $2g/year! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can almost pay for the gasoline needed to get to work! Thanks Amazon! Fuck the Unions!

  5. Re:Wow! $2g/year! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    god damn unions always fighting for a living wage n shit, buncha assholes!

  6. $2000/year vs 95% of all fees by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    because 2000 really covers 95% of fees for ANY education...

  7. Re:astounding generosity by TWX · · Score: 2

    Hey, it may be a shit sandwich, but at least it's a sandwich, which is more than they got before...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  8. This just discourages hiring full-time workers by Lord_of_the_nerf · · Score: 5, Funny

    I imagine we'll see more contract, part-time employees and a rash of mysterious sackable offences from employees at 2 years and 364 days.

    1. Re:This just discourages hiring full-time workers by assertation · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That is probably already the case.

      Hiring people for 39 hours instead of 40 hours a week is the oldest trick in the book for avoiding health coverage costs.

      Hiring temporary/contract people is also fairly standard for shitty working conditions. Such people tend not to have the resources to fight back.

  9. Sounds like lowes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They just staff the place with tons and tons of 'part-time' workers.

    Who were hired and told it was fulltime and then the hours slip down. And ohhh now you don't get full benefits and all that. Complain, ask for more hours? try to get more hours somehow? overtime? ohhhhhhh... you are so fired. For some minor complaint we documented months ago just in case of this.

    Didnt happen to me directly. But i saw it happen to alot of employees.

    Seems like a very corporate thing to do.
    Amazon knows they can pull the same thing. While making noise that they care.

    1. Re:Sounds like lowes by lessthan · · Score: 1

      And what make you feel awful is you knew what was going on, had it happen to you, and you said nothing. Because you really need this job...

      --
      Space Shuttle was a program that strapped humans to an explosion and tried to stab through the sky with fire and math
  10. Oh Wow! by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    [SARCASM]Where can I sign up[/SARCASM]

    1. Re:Oh Wow! by c0lo · · Score: 1

      [SARCASM]Where can I sign up[/SARCASM]

      Try this first, you may earn your extra $2000/year easier and earlier.

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
  11. I work here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was a temp, got converted, then hired into IT. Luckily there was a career path I was interested in... Due to what the company is and does, there just isn't much room for upward mobility or different career paths. They listened to the warehouse workers and gave them this option, which everyone loves. You put in your time and do your job, and after three years you can do what you want, and Amazon will pay for it.

    1. Re:I work here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "...and Amazon will pay for it"

      Even at the maximum, $8000 towards a degree from a technical/vocational school which will cost $35,000. That's not a benefit, that's an obligation. I'd prefer benefits that don't cost $27,000 out-of-pocket (plus interest if you take a loan).

    2. Re:I work here by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Go to school in California - a full load (15 credits) at a community college for in state residents is about $1400/yr plus student fees (maybe a couple hundred). You'd be out book costs and some exceptional class fees.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    3. Re:I work here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazon has no warehouses in California.

      If they did...

      I'm paying $3500/yr for just a hair over full time for tuition, books, and everything. $2,000 would go along way towards that, sure. But the cost of living is ridiculously high.

      And for non-residents, they're going to be paying about 5 times as much (or more) for tuition.

      Community college is relatively cheap pretty much everywhere for residents of that state/county/municipality. No need to come to CA.

  12. Getting ready for total automation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm speechless.

  13. Scam by rsilvergun · · Score: 0, Troll

    and a really, really nasty one. Take a look at the 'in demand' jobs. Aircraft Mechanic? CAD? What is this, 1980?

    It's a diploma mill. Amazon sends their employees to a diploma mill, gets a kick back from the mill, some of their workers pay for training they should've got on the job, and gets a nice tax break to boot, so the whole thing's paid for by the taxpayer.

    The worst thing is the employee comes out of the mill with a tonne of debt and no marketable skills. And they worked really hard to do it too. This is awful. It's taking advantage of people's hopes and dreams while grinding them to dust. It is literally the most awful thing I've ever seen a company do outside of Bhopal.

    There so much awful here I just don't know what to say. I didn't know people could be this bad...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a fair description of most of the for profit schools out there. Check out their advertising -- it's nonstop on local daytime TV (think Springer and Judge Judy and similarly insulting crap). These places largely exist for the purpose of separating the poor, ignorant, and frequently desperate from the Pell Grants (and sometimes their Stafford guaranteed student loan checks). If there is a God, I'm sure she's reserving a special circle of hell for the people who run these scams. I'd have more respect for a crack dealer or even a Congressman.

    2. Re:Scam by rsilvergun · · Score: 1, Interesting

      True, but what I find so terrible about this situation is that there isn't one single facet that doesn't benefit Amazon to the detriment of their employee and society. Amazon gets tax breaks, kick backs and profits from the school, and the employee gets debt, an increased workload and made to pay for their own job training. Some of these programs are even tailored to skills Amazon happens to need. You are quite literally paying them to be taught how to work their systems. Like I said, this is the most awful thing I've seen come out of the free market besides callous loses of life.

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    3. Re:Scam by c0lo · · Score: 1

      It's a diploma mill. Amazon sends their employees to a diploma mill, gets a kick back from the mill, some of their workers pay for training they should've got on the job, and gets a nice tax break to boot, so the whole thing's paid for by the taxpayer.

      You know... it's sounds line a good business proposition (successful corporations are always experts in externalizing the costs - otherwise how are they going to meet their legal obligations and make money for the stakeholders?)

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    4. Re:Scam by Lord_of_the_nerf · · Score: 2

      Amazon sells 'how to' books doesn't it?

      Education....solved.

    5. Re:Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HEY! Some of us work at diploma mills! Trickle.. uh.. LATERALLY!!! Don't ruin it!

    6. Re:Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "some of their workers pay for training they should've got on the job"

      Yeah, because aircraft mechanic is an Amazon job .

    7. Re:Scam by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

      and a really, really nasty one. Take a look at the 'in demand' jobs. Aircraft Mechanic? CAD? What is this, 1980?

      Actually, those jobs may very well be in demand - aircraft mechanics (remember, Amazon is headquartered in Washington, home of a rather well-known aircraft manufacturer).

      And a good A&P will never be out of work - if you're not working on big iron, there's tons of jets or even little single engine pistons going around.

      These are trade jobs - and for a lot of university bound students, they may be better off doing a trade than getting a university degree and debt. Depending on the trade, you can make quite a bit of money at it as well.

      Considering a warehouse fulfillment job is a no/low-skill job, being able to get trade education is extremely valuable. I'm sure Amazon would allow you to learn to be an electrician, plumber, as well.

    8. Re:Scam by J.+T.+MacLeod · · Score: 5, Informative

      Did you even read the article?

      It's not a diploma mill. Amazon is funding tuition for any accredited school, as long as the coursework is in the list of in-demand fields. There aren't kickbacks (Although if there were, so what? It would just mean it's not as generous, not that it's a scam.).

      Amazon is also willing to pay for 95% of the cost, up to their annual limit. At a community college, that will generally cover everything. There is no saddling anyone with ridiculous debt.

      This is a genuinely good program. There is no scam or any taking advantage of anyone. How did you even invent this in your imagination?

    9. Re:Scam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...any accredited school." Wrong.

      Accredited vocational/technical school or Associates Degree program. That basically reads ITT/PhoenixU. They typically don't offer classes in "high-demand jobs like Aircraft Mechanics, Engineering, CAD..." at a community college. Those seem like marketing words straight from diploma mill advertisements.

    10. Re:Scam by bitingduck · · Score: 2

      These are trade jobs - and for a lot of university bound students, they may be better off doing a trade than getting a university degree and debt. Depending on the trade, you can make quite a bit of money at it as well.

      Considering a warehouse fulfillment job is a no/low-skill job, being able to get trade education is extremely valuable. I'm sure Amazon would allow you to learn to be an electrician, plumber, as well.

      And many of those trade jobs are hard to offshore. Electrician can be a pretty decent job, and it's always hard to get good machinists and tool makers.

    11. Re:Scam by deadweight · · Score: 1

      The biggest problem I see is that a good A&P can make WAY more as a car mechanic combined with the ever-falling number of aircraft owners with any money left over to pay them. This is NOT a career with much of a future IMHO. Meanwhile the airlines have discovered the joys of outsourcing/off-shoring all the work they can.

    12. Re:Scam by quetwo · · Score: 1

      Both community colleges in my area offer all three -- "Aircraft Mechanics, Engineering, CAD". Sure, the engineering isn't a 4-year degree, so you won't be eligible for a P.E., but it is the requirement for a lot of positions out there.

    13. Re:Scam by J.+T.+MacLeod · · Score: 1

      No, it basically reads *many if not most community colleges*.

      I don't know where you got the idea that these kids of classes weren't available at community colleges (or other lower-cost/public vocational schools), but it certainly wasn't through research.

  14. So, in comparison by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How well or poorly does NewEgg treat its warehouse workers? How about Overstock, or Buy.com, or any of the other comparable online retailers?

    And really, while people here will complain about Amazon's treatment of its workers - if they have the lowest price, will you truly not buy from them because of it? Or will you just dodge the question and say "XYZ.com always beats them on price anyway, so I shop there"?

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:So, in comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's be honest... many of us can't afford to buy from more expensive places to try to make a point. We all saw how that worked with Walmart too.

      I'd like amazon to do business in a normal, humane way. I'm even confident they could stay extremely competitive. But being realistic, it needs to happen some other way.

    2. Re:So, in comparison by assertation · · Score: 1

      Two wrongs don't make a right,

      It is enough that any company being shitty to people is brought to light - even if the all aren't

      People buying by price is natural and is not the problem,

      Bezos who is in the headlines every few months contemplating doing rich man stunts can afford to take a LITTLE bit of his profits to treat his workers like decent people AND keep Amazon's prices competitive.

    3. Re:So, in comparison by SoupIsGood+Food · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How well or poorly does NewEgg treat its warehouse workers? How about Overstock, or Buy.com, or any of the other comparable online retailers?

      Most warehouse work is well paid with reasonable working conditions. An honest day's pay for an honest day's work is something that's fallen out of fashion in the Great Recession - Amazon just took it to the next level, and leveraged its considerable IT expertise to wring every last dime out of people desperate for work. Once the recession fades, they are going to be in real trouble when there's competition for their workforce, their reputation as an employer is permanently stained. If it doesn't fade, the workers will unionize and take what the company refuses to give - fair wages and decent working conditions - and they'll be in even deeper trouble when they can no longer meet their obligations to Prime customers, as the local distribution center is on strike.

    4. Re:So, in comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if they have the lowest price, will you truly not buy from them because of it?

      What are the chances that Amazon will change it's treatment of workers if I stop using Amazon?

      How do I keep child laborers or factories with "unfair" or unethical treatment of workers from making the clothes and electronic devises I use, and harvesting the food I buy? My funds are limited.

    5. Re:So, in comparison by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1

      I don't shop at Walmart. I know lots of folks who won't. So there are a good number of folks who will avoid the bad players. Just a lot of others who will gladly deal with them if they can save a buck.

  15. Re:astounding generosity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The first thing that popped into my mind was the apartment complex where I used to live that sold apartments by telling people they could get $4,000 if they became first time home buyers when they left. They didn't mention the little detail (though it was on the pamphlet) of how you had to get a mortgage through the specific provider for whom they made the deal. It was an advertisement for a mortgage company and they used it to entice you to rent with them.

    This deal doesn't sound like that, but working the same job for 7 years for pay plus an extra $8,000 (vested over 4 years starting at the end of year 3) sounds terrible. This should only be used by those people who find themselves "trapped" there anyway at the end of three years. And I hope they were saving during that time, because that $2,000/yr won't go far.

  16. That does not compute. by gman003 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "The program will cover 95% of the cost"
    "the maximum Amazon will contribute is $2,000/year for four years"

    2,000 $/yr * 4 yr = .95 X
    X = $8421

    So apparently you can become a trained aircraft mechanic for not much more than $8,000. Which is about 1/3 to 1/4 the cost of a common Bachelor's degree.

    Yeah, either the summary dropped a zero somewhere, aircraft mechanics are trained far less than you would think, or that 95% figure is *way* off.

    1. Re:That does not compute. by ComfortablyAmbiguous · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not to encourage article reading, but they cover 95% of the cost of tuition, up to a maximum of $2000 dollars a year. So if your tuition is $1000 per year ( yea, yea, I know, ridiculously low) they would reimburse you $950. If your tuition is $10,000 a year, you get $2000. What Amazon is willing to pay has nothing to do with what it actually costs. All of which reinforces the fact that this is more of a PR move than a real, viable help with a serious education. There are a number of low-end jobs (yes, even McDonald's) that offer tuition assistance to some degree or the other. This isn't looking like an especially fine deal.

    2. Re:That does not compute. by colinnwn · · Score: 4, Informative

      An Airframe & Powerplant training program that gets you eligible to take the FAA license test takes just under 2 years, and costs between $8,000 for community college programs, up to $30,000 for private schools.

    3. Re:That does not compute. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not quite like that. When you graduate from a college aircraft mechanic program, you're essentially an apprentice. Next you must pass the government exams /plus/ have a set amount of time working at the job for a qualified employer to acquire the various staged levels of the actual licensed trade.

      (disclaimer, I did this in Canada, which is similar but not identical to the Yank system, and I did it decades ago. And yup, it was a diploma mill scam then too. Waay too many graduates for the very few jobs available. Year after year.)

    4. Re:That does not compute. by sangreal66 · · Score: 1

      Well, it isn't for Bachelor degrees. It specifically says it is for "technical and vocational certifications or associate's degrees"

    5. Re:That does not compute. by superdana · · Score: 1, Informative

      You can become a fully qualified, FAA-certified airframe or powerplant tech with a two-year degree from most community colleges, as long as the school is certified under FAR Part 147. I know people like to look down their noses at community colleges but these graduates really are qualified, and they have to pass the same FAA exams as every other mechanic.

    6. Re:That does not compute. by superdana · · Score: 0

      In the US, if the school is certificate under Part 147 rules, you don't need to do an apprenticeship.

    7. Re:That does not compute. by AnonyMouseCowWard · · Score: 1

      Aircraft mechanics shouldn't need a Bachelor degree... You're a mechanic, not an aerospace engineer. Same for CAD designers or what not. These are jobs, good jobs, that don't require an university degree (and it should stay like that).

  17. Re:Wow! $2g/year! by The+Mighty+Buzzard · · Score: 1

    Living wage my ass. Union shovel/broom-jockeys in my neck of the woods make twice what any other entry-level position in the area pays and they get benefits on top of that.

    --
    Violence is like duct tape. If it doesn't solve the problem, you didn't use enough.
  18. Noticed Between the Lines by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "You should buy stuff from us instead of WalMart because we treat our employees about 50% better than they do."

    separate matter: the folks here who are saying that working three years in a warehouse is a death sentence should get out and meet some real people, and try a bit harder to not be entitled pricks. One caveat: if you do meet a real warehouse worker (or dock worker, or other transportation/inventory logistics person), watch out for your teeth.

    Here's another angle: people who have the self-discipline to work in a tough job like that for at least three years without quitting and going home to live in their parents' basement stand a good chance at managing the demands of the work/school balance and will likely complete their coursework.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:Noticed Between the Lines by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Not a warehouse, an AMAZON warehouse. Certainly warehousing is an honorable profession, but by some accounts working in an Amazon warehouse is a tough job made awful. I suspect one of those warehouse or dock workers would take a particularly dim view of Amazon's reported extensive use of temp agencies.

    2. Re:Noticed Between the Lines by Noxal · · Score: 0

      "Here's another angle: people who have the self-discipline to work in a tough job like that for at least three years without quitting and going home to live in their parents' basement stand a good chance at managing the demands of the work/school balance and will likely complete their coursework."

      As a student that's been working full time in a warehouse for over three years and recently moved OUT of his parents' basement, it's comforting to hear somebody say that!

    3. Re:Noticed Between the Lines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      i've worked in a few warehouses in my day: a designer clothes brand, a furniture importer and barnes and noble distribution center.

      the barnes and noble one was by FAR the worst. it wasn't "pick and pack" or "unload trucks fast" which is not that hard and breaks up the monotony of the day between shipments...barnes and noble was just standing next to a very loud conveyor belt that had an endless stream of book orders on it which i just had to pick up scan and throw in a bin, for 8 hours with a lunch break if you're lucky but sometimes they would get "mixed up" and leave a team of guys working all day, by accident of course, and since most of the dudes were mexicans who didn't speak english of course they really had no clue what was going on and couldn't say anything. and yes i quit that job, you're damn right. it paid minimum wage and was absolutely grueling compared to basically any other minimum wage job. if amazon is anything like barnes and noble then yes it's fucking nightmare.

    4. Re:Noticed Between the Lines by SomePgmr · · Score: 2

      As the guy who said it originally, someone who worked in a warehouse, and someone who is surrounded by people that work in warehouses all day, that's precisely what I was getting at. It was about Amazon's working conditions, not a slight against anyone based on their job description.

      I'm not worried about anyone punching me in the mouth, or some random slashdotter getting all indignant about it, but it was worth clarifying. Thanks.

    5. Re:Noticed Between the Lines by assertation · · Score: 2

      Great points, but it sounds like you are the one with the attitude problem.

      I've seen a number of news articles about the lousy working conditions at Amazon over the years so I tend to think that those conditions are real and really bad, not an exagerration of an overpriveleged bacon eating basement living libertarian IT worker.

      Given that it is likely conditions at Amazon are that bad, your anger should be directed at Amazon, not people commentators on Slashdot...........but that wouldn't be as easy.

    6. Re:Noticed Between the Lines by Guspaz · · Score: 1

      It should be noted that one of the reasons why it's made awful (and one reason why the OP's "not a death sentence" may be wrong) is because Amazon likes to melt their employees by saving money. For many years they refused to air condition their warehouses, and refused to open garage doors to get some cross-breeze going citing "theft concerns". The result? 110 degrees Fahrenheit working environment, with 15 employees in one warehouse fainting of heatstroke in a single day.

      It was only after there was a big thing in the media about it that Amazon agreed to install industrial air conditioners.

    7. Re:Noticed Between the Lines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly, they're not even unique. There's no way my employer is going to install AC near the 120,000 BTU furnace operating just under 800F. And the temperature (not the heat index, but the temperature outside and not counting any contribution from our furnace) tops 110F regularly.

      Swamp coolers and cooling necklaces are nice, but they don't quite cut it, believe me.

  19. Only $2k? by fragMasterFlash · · Score: 3, Informative

    US businesses can deduct up to $5250 per employee per year in schedule C federal income tax filings for tuition reimbursement. I guess Amazon would rather pay taxes than help employees realize their full potential.

    1. Re:Only $2k? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 0

      Well... they're spending less in taxes than they would if they deducted that much tuition. It's more likely they'd just rather have more money.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:Only $2k? by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Er, the tax rate is less than 100%. So it is always better to pay tax, than to give away money. In this, case by keep the rest of the money, $3250, they pay a tax of 15% on it, which means they get to keep a lot it.

  20. harsh warehouse working conditions by Osgeld · · Score: 4, Insightful

    sorry, I had been a box monkey for most of my 20's, the work is mindless, dirty, hotter than hell during summer, cold as shit during winter and requires long hours of physical activity and standing on your feet all while getting meh pay...

    and yet whenever you see an amazon warehouse, they have padded mats to stand on, roller tracks, and fairly new equipment and the place is pretty organized and clean... I only had one warehouse job during that time and I considered it pretty cushy ... though a honest days work.

    harsh is trodding a 1,100 lb palette of car batteries 50 yards in 112 degree heat on a palette jack with a lumpy wheel that liked to drag, but I did it for 3 years to keep the rent paid while in school. I would love to see what is harsh is in a state of the art warehouse that's not ran by two hillbilly brothers and only 1 forklift in the building that's busted half the time and a leaky roof.

    yea get off my lawn, but at the same time quit being a pussy, there are a lot tougher jobs out there than box monkey #21.

    1. Re:harsh warehouse working conditions by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

      You should have gone on welfare instead. You make more money, and don't have to work. It's nobody's fault but your own you have some sort of bizarre self-sacrificing gene that requires you to do stupid things and complain about it afterwards. There is no glory in work, you're just a tool of the capitalist bankers. Sit back and relax, enjoy wealth redistribution instead.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:harsh warehouse working conditions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some folks have moral, ethical or self-esteem issues about collecting welfare.

      I've done job interviews more than a few times. I have, do and would consider someone with a stretch of manual labor over someone that sat on welfare for X years without a fairly good reason. If I was told they had a health issue or whatnot, and spent their time honing their skills or whatnot, I'd give it a pass. But "I didn't want to be a tool of the capitalist bankers"? No thank you, please leave now.

  21. and people goto full time colleges and come out th by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    and people goto full time colleges and come out the same way lot's of debt and big skills gaps.

    We need a middle of the road system building on the training system and add apprenticeships to it. College is to far to the theory side of things and is loaded with stuff from the past and lots of filler.

  22. Re:astounding generosity by Sir_Sri · · Score: 5, Informative

    For some community college programmes that might be reasonable.

    http://www.alameda.peralta.edu/apps/comm.asp?$1=20092

    Lists aviation maintenance technology as a total cost of 3200 dollars including tuition and tools. Which presumably you could do in 1 year straight out of school, or in 2 or 3 if you're working at amazon, but hey, it's better than minimum wage at the end of it, and if you can't get student loans, or don't want to have them or whatever it's a better than nothing option.

    You have to consider what 2000 dollars is relative to their existing pay. Amazon claims their fulfillment centres pay '30% more than a retail job', which are, apparently (http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes412031.htm) 25k. So an employee making ~ 32k is getting offered 2k (tax free? not sure how that's like in the US), so 6% of your pay for a chance to get out of it. And at 32k you can at least live, not live well, but live, and not be in debt at the end of it. It's not spectacular, but it's still a lot of money.

  23. Dont believe it by Dun+Kick+The+Noob · · Score: 1

    Don't forget there is always approval wall. Reasons ive been given, heard from colleagues
    1. Theres no budget (then they send someone using the same budget to an introductory course to java programming)(yah he was a java programmer %$&*&*)
    2. You are well qualified and dont need training (contradict with promotion time , you dont have the qualifications that the other guy has)
    3. You are in a critical role you need to train back up to cover( righhttttt)
    4. Budget is used up
    5. Not Your Turn
    Besides after you are trained, there is no guarantee you can get that next opening in the company.

    Also this programme is targeted at associate degrees and less, which really has very little value since there is a huge glut for bachelors
    This should be a labor retention policy dressed as a training policy,

    You prevent turnover for the duration of the course and also things such as pay increments and bad reviews. Employees tend not to hop when they have to study,they want stability. Even Bad Stability. I know i was one of them

  24. yeah right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like they'll ever have time to use that benefit. Amazon are freaking slave drivers, working their employees around the clock

  25. Re:Wow! $2g/year! by bhcompy · · Score: 1

    When you start with UPS as a warehouse worker you make less than minimum wage after initiation and dues for the first few years. Thanks for looking out for me Teamsters

  26. Re:and people goto full time colleges and come out by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    Not really. Coming out of a proper college they come out better. They have new skills and abilities. Ones that are useful outside of their current employers work environment. What these mills do is one of two things: a) teach a useless skill or b) teach a highly, highly specialized skill only relevant to the current employer.

    I'm not going to argue the intangible benefits to society of traditional College because I think the phrase 'intangible benefits' is shorthand for 'I'm too lazy to quantify the benefits so I'll just call them intangible".

    Apprenticeships look good in theory, but that assumes we need that many full time workers. Automation and productivity increases mean we need less full time workers, not more. The filler will keeps students out of the work force, and properly applied give them better baseline thinking skills. They then contribute more to society as a whole (if only by virtue of being better citizens). Also, it's too easy for apprenticeships to devolve into free, borderline slave, labor. We're already seeing this with unpaid interns being made to do productive work.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  27. umm by buddyglass · · Score: 0

    This seems a little patronizing. If I were an Amazon employee I might rather they take the money they're planning to spend subsidizing employee training and just pay it out in the form of additional salary. Then I could spend it on whatever I pleased.

  28. Perpetuating the student loan debacle by howdoiturnthison · · Score: 0

    The diploma mill issue is a good point. It's also important to note that besides kickbacks, trade schools with shady accreditation often pressure their reps to find new applicants. Also, less reputable schools often milk the federal student loan program for what it's worth by farming applicants and then saddling them with huge loans through high-pressure tactics (don't read, just sign it!). Hey, why should the school care if the student defaults? They're getting the gov't dough up front. Amazon might think they're going to get PR kudos, but in reality they're just compounding loan fraud, high default rates, disillusioned unemployed persons, and an already craptastic consumer economy. Who really loses? The hardworking student at a reputable institution who needs a federal loan and has the means and intent to pay it off. Students such as these will get shafted if/when Congress cuts down student loan programs because of the systemic problems cited.

  29. Not funny at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Why is this modded funny? This isn't funny. I have been laid off the day before a raise or benefit increase multiple times in the last decade.

    When the corporate policy says get X piece of paper and you will receive a 20% raise on your next review, be prepared to find yourself out of a job the day before that review. It happened to me, it will happen to you.

    1. Re:Not funny at all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's happened to me at 3 jobs in the last 5 years, and I've seen it happen to others at many (if not all) corporations I've worked for in the last 18 years,

      The companies offer a new 'Golden Perk' and then fires everyone elligible or they invent ways to make people inelligible (a non-existent or infrequently offered training program is a favorite). They implement arbitrary requirements that literally can't be met. PAYING benefits doesn't appear profitable to corporations, but OFFERING them attracts talent, so naturally they adopt the policy of offering benefits, circumventing any paths that lead to delivering them.

      3-year requirement? Amazon probably doesn't have a single non-executive employee that's been there 3 years.

  30. Re:astounding generosity by jhoegl · · Score: 2

    and when it comes time to get a raise, they can hold this over your head.
    Id rather take a 2k/yr raise than this BS.

  31. Indeed. I have done worse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have had hard jobs. Hauling drywall around for half a cent a square foot and a quota of 48,000 pounds a day for 100 bucks was the worst. (take that 16 ton coal miners) Some drywall is even covered in lead (x-ray rooms) that tripled the weight for the same pay. Taking it up 10 flights of stairs didn't pay any better either.

    That job taught me some things:
    Lead tastes delicious and it stains your skin smurf blue.
    I know what asbestos smells like.
    Go limp before you are crushed by something to avoid broken bones.
    With enough weight falling on your hand all the blood can be forced to one side, splitting it open and spraying everything in the area.
    Saying 'Fuck you! I'm calling OSHA.' when someone tells you to clean up the blood before you go home will get you fired.
    OSHA doesn't care.

    Good times.

  32. Amazon is switching to robots by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative

    Amazon just bought Kiva Systems, which makes warehouse fulfillment system robots. Kiva already powers orders from major brands including Crate and Barrel, Soap.com, Dillards, Drugstore.com, Gap, Office Depot, Saks, Staples, Timberland, Toys-R-Us, and Walgreens. This is what order fulfillment is like with those robots. It takes about two minutes to learn the job and there is no chance for advancement.

    The people being "retrained" will be laid off soon.

    1. Re:Amazon is switching to robots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I really don't think this has anything to do with personal development as much as it has to do with the upcoming cattle call for peak season.This is more or less another carrot to dangle since it's getting harder to get people to come back. People don't like being led on and generally treated like shit from managers that act as if they are running a military operation.It gets old after the first week or so. I spent a few years there and still feel bad for the way temps. were treated. I've seen Kiva in action and am not at all impressed - lot of down time.

    2. Re:Amazon is switching to robots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Replying anonymously because I work for one of the companies mentioned. Kiva is very cool, and is very good a increasing productivity in picking lots of small items. However, it has issues with bulk carton picking, putaway, and shipping. There's a lot more going on in a warehouse than putting items into boxes, and folks need to realize that plenty of other technologies exist in this market to make picking very efficient, for the purpose of minimizing employees. Pick to light, pick to voice, carousels, a-frames, high speed conveyors, even optimized cart/path picking can have similar result to Kiva, depending on the types of product picked, and the overall pick volume.

    3. Re:Amazon is switching to robots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      In the early 90's I worked for a company that automated reprinting credit card statements from microfiche readers.

      The old way was a printed paper was handed to a worker with a list of 50 or so reprints. The worker would then go to the library checkout of the film for a max of 10 rolls of film in a small box. The worker would then load the roll in the machine and manually search for the correct statement to print, then hit the print button. The process would then start over after unloading the film. The next statement might be on the same film.

      The company I worked for automated the machine via a serial port, setup a terminal in the library of films after bar coding them, and once the correct film was loaded, searched and printed all the statements on that roll with no user intervention. The machine even ejected the film to wait for the next one to be loaded.

      Me and another worker would go train 10 people at a time on the new system. At the end of the week, management would always ask us which workers they should keep. The usual rate was 2 workers out of the 10 we trained at the end of the week.

      I left the job in less than a year knowing that every time I went to install and train 80% of them would have no job at the end of the week.

      It is all good now that every thing is stored on hard drives somewhere and microfiche machines are now a thing of history.

      captcha: common

    4. Re:Amazon is switching to robots by codepigeon · · Score: 1

      Interesting. I wonder if the transition to a full robotic staff is predicted to be about three years. This retraining offer could be an effort to head off the bad PR of replacing their human warehouse workers.
      "We offered to retrain them!"-Amazon

    5. Re:Amazon is switching to robots by Animats · · Score: 1

      plenty of other technologies exist in this market to make picking very efficient, for the purpose of minimizing employees.

      True. The big win for Kiva is standardization and simplicity of installation. Conveyors, stacker cranes, and similar machinery have to be built as semi-custom products for each warehouse. All Kiva has to do for installation is put bar-code squares on the floor. Everything else is a standard product. Kiva systems thus require far less engineering expertise in the field. They don't even have to provide much field service; all the little robots are interchangeable, and you can just ship failed ones back for repairs. Kiva itself has only a few hundred employees.

      In other words, there won't be jobs servicing the robots.

  33. meh by eWarz · · Score: 1

    The small business I work for offers full tuition reimbursement for any class provided you pass. Try again amazon.

  34. Luxury. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We used to have to get out of the lake at six o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of 'ot gravel, work twenty hour day at mill for tuppence a month, come home, and Dad would thrash us to sleep with a broken bottle, if we were lucky!

  35. Re:astounding generosity by superdana · · Score: 0

    offered 2k (tax free? not sure how that's like in the US)

    The devil's in the details of course but generally speaking, scholarships are tax-free.

  36. McDonalds, UPS.... by sonamchauhan · · Score: 4, Informative

    Educational assistance is fairly common...

    McDonalds, UPS...
    http://work.lifegoesstrong.com/article/don-t-turn-your-back-free-education

    "McDonald's tuition assistance program will reimburse up to $5,250 a year (which is the maximum IRS exemption), and $2,000 for part-time employees, which in effect adds two dollars an hour to someone's earnings. UPS has a program called Earn and Learn where students can have their tuition, expenses and transportation paid for if they work a part-time schedule; since 1999, UPS has paid out more than $47 million in tuition assistance alone."

    B&N
    http://www.barnesandnobleinc.com/jobs/benefits/benefits.html

    "Continuing Education
    Our continuing education program offers full-time booksellers tuition assistance if you choose to further your business career by taking courses toward a job-related degree. "

    1. Re:McDonalds, UPS.... by trout007 · · Score: 1

      Many companies that employee lower skilled workers realize that there isn't room in the company for everyone to advance. They make these benefits available to attract people that want an education and need a job to help pay their way through school. The know that even having someone on board for 4 years both can benefit. The company gets someone that is stable and they can count on for 4 years. The employees get paid and tuition.

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
  37. Re:astounding generosity by jpapon · · Score: 1

    Someone making 30k a year is only paying 15% anyways.

    --
    -- Let us endeavor so to live that when we pass even the undertaker shall be sorry. -- M. Twain
  38. Toot toot by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

    I don't mean to toot my own horn, but maybe those "train workers" could find new jobs with Ruby on Rails.

    --
    Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  39. Well, of course, we had it tough. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We used to 'ave to get up out of shoebox at twelve o'clock at night and lick road clean wit' tongue. We had two bits of cold gravel, worked twenty-four hours a day at mill for sixpence every four years, and when we got home our Dad would slice us in two wit' bread knife.

    1. Re:Well, of course, we had it tough. by deadweight · · Score: 1

      You had a SHOEBOX! You were rich! I dreamed one day I would have such luxury and I had to work 48 hours a day UNDER the mill and pay them for the privilege.

  40. Re:and people goto full time colleges and come out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You apparently havent' interviewed the ignorant fools our "liberal arts" schools have been churning through. I see more motivation to work and desire to learn from University of Pheonix students than from Division I schools. Quality of the education appears to only be affected by the individual, not the schools.

  41. Re:astounding generosity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their front page, yesterday, said they'd pay up to 95% of your tuition, so to now read that it's up to "$2,000/yr" is a little disheartening. That's like a decent quarterly bonus, at best. I mean, it's better than nothing, but plenty of other companies have much better tuition assistance.

  42. Re:Wow! $2g/year! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's why we need to DESTROY the fucking unions. Bring everyone down to the same level that we deserve for being the shit eating losers that we are.

  43. You're looking at the wrong schools by brokeninside · · Score: 1

    The local county community college here charges $112 per credit hour for part students. Two classes per term and three terms per year put you at $2,016 per year which is right about where the benefit maxes out. Coursework at that rate is probably on track for a student to get an associate's degree in four years with not much out of pocket other than books, and miscellaneous fees.

    I think that's a fairly good deal for what is effectively a non-skilled manual labor position with limited room for growth.

  44. Re:Wow! $2g/year! by The+Mighty+Buzzard · · Score: 1

    Why bother? They're doing a fine job of destroying themselves by strangling the businesses they extort. Every union job held directly causes the unemployment of the person the other half of their wage could have paid.

    --
    Violence is like duct tape. If it doesn't solve the problem, you didn't use enough.
  45. You don't seem to understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What makes sense to you, individually, does not matter.

    As far as Amazon's labor practices are concerned, all that matters is the behavior of the majority of its customers.

    The majority of its customers don't think reflectively, like you do. They do not hold your principles, and they cannot be made to. Most of them just aim for cheap and move on.

    If you can find a way to nudge the masses to a higher state of being, mission accomplished! But until then, the only things that are going to drive a real improvement in labor conditions are going to be unions and governmental regulations (such as they are).

    Amazon seems to be trying to get in front of these unpleasant alternatives. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.

  46. Re:astounding generosity by Sir_Sri · · Score: 1

    when you only make 30k 15% of 2000 = 300 bucks is a lot of money.

  47. Re:astounding generosity by Sir_Sri · · Score: 1

    Depends how much those programmes usually cost. If you can get airline mechanic training for 3200 dollars one place and 32000 another down the road amazon is making clear it wants you in the 3200 dollar one.

  48. Re:astounding generosity by anyGould · · Score: 1

    Not to mention that it requires you to stay employed with Amazon for three years. There's two big caveats there - first, how many people working in the warehouses actually work for Amazon (as opposed to whatever temp agency they're contracting out to)? Second, considering how many US states have at-will employment, what's to stop them from punting you out the door at 35 months? (And if they're particularly screwy, waiting two weeks, then offering your job back - it says "consecutive", so any break in your work history will reset the clock.

    I'm sure we'll hear some selected "success stories" from this, but I doubt Amazon is going to be funding a mass of long-term employees.

  49. Re:Wow! $2g/year! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you start with UPS as a warehouse worker you make less than minimum wage after initiation and dues for the first few years. Thanks for looking out for me Teamsters

    Might want to check with those Teamsters first - it might be UPS figured out how to beat the system.

    Here's the trick - union wages are great if you're planning to stay for a while, but if you're not intending to be there 10-20 years you don't really care what the wages will be at that point. Company knows this, so they offer a deal that has little/no salary bonus, but a decent-sized signing bonus. Get it in-front of the employees, and all those new folks will happily take a few grand up-front and miss the fact that they've screwed themselves long term. (Or more properly, screwed the guy coming after them).

  50. Re:Wow! $2g/year! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a tangled web of fallacy we weave. While I'd agree that _some_ Unions should be investigated, and other unions may be taking advantage, for the most part unions are there to do what the poster states. Here is a nice page for you to read on Labor Unions.

    A person should not scrap the concept because of wrong doing, or else we would have nothing in the world. Find and Fix corruption, and regulate where necessary. Education, perhaps it should be sought out!

  51. Re:and people goto full time colleges and come out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder who is the ignorant one, since you vent on Liberal Arts yet neglect what the primary subject matter of Liberal Arts is: Critical Thinking. If one can think, they can learn any other subject.

    Maybe you should learn what the Trivium was, and why it was the primary education for a couple thousand years. (though not always called Trivium the curriculum matched). then ask yourself why we did away with teaching Liberal Arts in public schools about fifty years ago.

    As an example: Most coders coming out of schools now that lack Liberal Arts in their education are simply horrible. They lack problem solving skills, and have no desire to learn basic concepts of hardware. Most can't tell you why a Sparc binary can't run on their Windows box. They simply follow coding instructions that other people give them.. it takes them years to be useful beyond being told exactly what to do.

  52. Re:Wow! $2g/year! by The+Mighty+Buzzard · · Score: 1

    No, labor unions were a good idea back in the 30s when unemployment rates meant you had to take what they gave or be jobless. Today, with unemployment being a very workable eight-ish percent, they exist solely to enrich their members at the expense of the health of the companies they work for. As near as I can tell, their formula is take the average wage for the position, double it, ask for 25% more worth of benefits, and make it all but impossible to fire anyone even if they're incapable of or unwilling to doing their job.

    --
    Violence is like duct tape. If it doesn't solve the problem, you didn't use enough.
  53. Actual factory worker here, you're a bit off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > separate matter: the folks here who are saying that working three years in a warehouse is a death sentence should get out and meet some real people, and try a bit harder to not be entitled pricks.

    Hello. I currently work at a factory, albeit not one of Amazon's. We've worked almost 30 hours in the past two days. There is no AC. I fight heat stroke by using my own money to buy cans of Gatorade powder and share them with my shift. Management had their heads up their asses about it until I started making formal complaints about the heat. I'm a first aid provider, so it was well within my prerogative. It's not exactly a "death sentence" but I'm pretty sure we'd have had someone collapse by now but for my meddling. I've put in almost 3 years on the floor, so I think I'm qualified to speak about how things are on a production floor. I'll be brief: it sucks.

    > Here's another angle: people who have the self-discipline to work in a tough job like that for at least three years without quitting and going home to live in their parents' basement stand a good chance at managing the demands of the work/school balance and will likely complete their coursework.

    This is nice, but it does absolutely nothing for the vast majority of Amazon's temps, which make up half or more of their workforce. Maybe some will, but if they're anything like the guys I know, they'll never get the chance. The people who work where I do pretty much all have a record, a pile of bills, and can't afford any time for self-improvement. They're going to go home and play on an old x-box or buy a 40oz and try to forget how miserable work is. I hope the few who can make use of that chance do so, but I have no illusions about how many will.

    You don't become a factory worker by having high self-discipline. You just don't. And if you do, you don't stay there long. I myself am lacking, though I actually did just complete an educational program that I hope will get me out of this dump. But I had spare cash and I'm one of the lucky few. We have a good crew and I try to take care of them. I have savings, unlike the rest, so I can afford liberties they cannot.

    Yes, they work tough jobs and I'll give them respect for that. But I'm not one for starry-eyed delusions about how responsible the average factory worker is. They're not bad people, really, but you just don't end up in a factory job by being responsible. You just don't. If you're that damned responsible, you'll get the hell out of there before very long. Believe me, I can see where I've been irresponsible in the past, and I'm working my ass off to run straight out the damned door.