Slashdot Mirror
Struggling Workers Found Sleeping In Tents Behind Amazon's Warehouse (thecourier.co.uk)
"At least three tents have been spotted in woodland beside the online retail giant's base," reports a Scottish newspaper -- hidden behind trees, but within sight of Amazon's warehouse, and right next to a busy highway. An anonymous reader writes:
Despite Scotland's "bitterly cold winter nights" -- with lows in the 30s -- the tent "was easier and cheaper than commuting from his home," one Amazon worker told the Courier. (Though yesterday someone stole all of his camping equipment.) Amazon charges its employees for shuttle service to the fulfillment center, which "swallows up a lot of the weekly wage," one political party leader told the Courier, "forcing people to seek ever more desperate ways of making work pay.
"Amazon should be ashamed that they pay their workers so little that they have to camp out in the dead of winter to make ends meet..." he continued. "They pay a small amount of tax and received millions of pounds from the Scottish National Party Government, so the least they should do is pay the proper living wage." Though the newspaper reports that holiday shopping has created 4,000 temporary jobs in the small town of Dunfermline, "The company came under fire last month from local activists who claimed that agency workers are working up to 60 hours per week for little more than the minimum wage and are harshly treated."
Amazon responded, "The safety and well-being of our permanent and temporary associates is our number one priority."
"Amazon should be ashamed that they pay their workers so little that they have to camp out in the dead of winter to make ends meet..." he continued. "They pay a small amount of tax and received millions of pounds from the Scottish National Party Government, so the least they should do is pay the proper living wage." Though the newspaper reports that holiday shopping has created 4,000 temporary jobs in the small town of Dunfermline, "The company came under fire last month from local activists who claimed that agency workers are working up to 60 hours per week for little more than the minimum wage and are harshly treated."
Amazon responded, "The safety and well-being of our permanent and temporary associates is our number one priority."
You should be ashamed you pay so little for the goods and services that free-market economies provide. Calculate all the money you've saved and remit that total to the workers' salary augmentation fund.
"The safety and well-being of our permanent and temporary associates is our number one priority."
When a big stink was made about all the counterfeit products on Amazon, maintaining customer confidence that all products are legitimate was your number one priority. When 80,000 Kindle users' passwords were dumped online, the security of your customers was your number one priority. Now you claim the safety of your employees is your number one priority.
This is all bullshit. You can only have one number one priority, and we all know that's MAKING MONEY.
No True Scotsman would use a tent... He'd cuddle up with some sheep behind the nearest hedge and wait it out...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
I'm sorry but companies aren't allowed to operate like that in the EU or the UK.
Apparently they are.
#DeleteChrome
Yes, they could work in a book shop for example.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
if you're not paid enough, find another job!
A 2nd-order economic fallacy: "There are an infinite number of jobs".
It is a derivative of the base, first order fallacy: "infinite consumption".
We will always have infinite consumption because of ever increasing population (see: Malthus) and ever increasing wants and needs. No matter how much food or shelter you have, you will always want more. It's basic human nature.
Infinite consumption demands infinite production, which necessarily requires infinite labor.
If you're not paid enough, go find another job!
It's not as if they are in limited supply...
I hate Wally World and I've never even been in a union.
Don't tell people what their issues really have to do with. Instead, listen to them and they will tell you. In my experience even those union guys are capable of independent thought and can determine what their motivations are.
People aren't going to hate Amazon because the customer experience is pretty good, and they rely on the government to enforce basic labor standards. It isn't something people are very interested in on a per-company basis. Whereas issues with big box stores replacing numerous industries with many fewer jobs is more of a community issue, where the only solution is for the people who care to shop more locally and preserve some fraction of the smaller businesses.
The one time I did shop at Wally World, we received a wedding gift of a $50 gift card from there. Which was easy to solve, we bought a gift for a holiday charity event.
Yes, we should thank Amazon for allowing workers to sleep in tents.
Once an employee leaves Amazon's premises it is none of Amazon's damn business what they do or don't do. They have no right to "allow" or "prohibit" their employees from using, or not using, any sleeping arrangement.
Disclaimer: When I first moved to Silicon Valley, I lived in a van for two years.
Out of 4,000 workers, a newspaper managed to find three tents out in the woods, one of which they reported as apparently abandoned and the actual person in one tent made it clear he had a home elsewhere he could sleep in, but preferred to be closer to work to save on commuting costs.
Clearly Amazon is at fault for daring to provide someone employment. Probably the other 3,998 or so people they hired are just sleeping without tents because of their super low wages, right?
In most places (notably, non-prisons and without servant's quarters...), companies don't decide for and aren't responsible for their employees where and how they are allowed to live. That's up to the employee to decide for themselves.
The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
The summary says "he stuff was stolen". But the article itself is much less clear:
He added that he had opted to stay in a tent as it was easier and cheaper than commuting from his home in Perth, although his camping equipment had disappeared by Friday afternoon.
Did he say it had vanished? Or did the article writer find it had vanished on Friday? Not at all clear.
Also no aspect of the interview really asking the guy if he "had to" camp as the Willie bloke claimed, they just want you to assume that is the case. The actual guy who was camping just said it was cheaper and easier - if you are just going to be there a few week or two for seasonal work why wouldn't you prefer this to any kind of commute? Back when I used to work insane hours programming I slept under my desk for a week. It wasn't because I had to, it was just way easier at the time.
Also low 30's (assuming F) is not "battery cold", it's just mildly chilly and most sleeping bags would handle that temperature easily. I've camped before in sub-zero (again F) temperatures before and that's not at all uncomfortable with the right equipment.
Basically the whole thing seems written with a pre-determined viewpoint in mind and hardly any real research or interviewing done.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Down by the river?
Because of the asymmetry in levels of influence. Don't you remember the 19th-century industrialization process and the civic problems it spawned I until proper worker protection, unions etc were invented? Geez, don't you guys learn anythingnin school over there?
Commuting cost is because Amazon shuttle is expensive. Amazon pay people salary and then charges them a lot to get to and from work. The commuting cost is not independent of Amazon.
One of the engineers was living in his car in the parking lot, and at the time this guy had to have been making more than the average household income. I asked him why he didn't get an apartment and he shrugged and said he didn't see any reason to.
Indeed never presume to understand the reasons why people do something. We had an instrument technician who parked his caravan outside our plant when we hired him as a temporary worker. I asked him about it and he said it was easy. He was single, not attached to a location, had no expenses, and after doing it for under 2 years had enough money to buy a house in cash setting him up for a fantastic future life.
Here I am 8 years later with a mortgage.