Slashdot Mirror


Amazon Will Raise Its Minimum Wage To $15 For All 350,000 US Workers (recode.net)

Amazon said Tuesday it's raising the minimum wage for all 350,000 of its U.S. employees to $15, effective next month. From a report: The new pay threshold will go into effect Nov. 1 and impact all full-time, temporary and seasonal workers across the company's U.S. warehouse and customer service teams as well as Whole Foods, the company said in a blog post. It did not disclose what its current minimum pay wage is for U.S. workers, perhaps in part because there is not one set rate. "We listened to our critics, thought hard about what we wanted to do, and decided we want to lead," Amazon founder and CEO Jeff Bezos said in a statement. "We're excited about this change and encourage our competitors and other large employers to join us." Alongside the cash compensation bump, Amazon said it will eventually eliminate its practice of granting stock to these workers and will instead institute a program that allows them to purchase Amazon stock through the company. The announcement comes as Amazon faces increased criticism over its pay and treatment of warehouse workers. Senator Bernie Sanders, in particular, has been relentless in his criticism of Amazon over the last few months, proposing a bill that would tax the company as a penalty for having workers who need food stamps and other public assistance to make ends meet.

15 of 327 comments (clear)

  1. This is not helpful by JackieBrown · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Doing something like this across the board makes no sense since so many locations have completely different costs of living.

    Some areas, this will be so over paid that it will cause prices to rise as other companies start having to match the wages.

    In other areas, 15 is not even close to meeting a living wage that it will do nothing to help.

    1. Re:This is not helpful by jellomizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So people who live in a populated area, with a lot of job opportunity (high price areas) will move from living in abject poverty to just poverty.
      The people who live in a less populated area, with little other job opportunities (low price areas) can now have a comfortable life style.

      Perhaps there should be more effort in finding way to lower cost of living in Cities, vs. finding ways to improve property costs (AKA raising the cost of living)

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re:This is not helpful by jeff4747 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That will increase the costs throughout the entire supply chain.

      Here's what you're desperately skipping over:

      It will increase the costs throughout the entire supply chain by a trivial amount because wages are a tiny fraction of the costs in the supply chain.

      You keep insisting that the increase will be large because you keep mistakenly thinking wages are a large expense. They aren't. That 4% increase on a 106% increase in wages is one of the worst-case scenarios.

      When you sum all of the costs down the supply chain, labor is the dominant force.

      Once again [Citation Required].

  2. Re:A living wage for workers? by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but that's SOCALISM!!

    In this case it is capitalism because Amazon is doing it to keep hold of it's workforce and probably to have a better public image so it will sell more crap. The government isn't forcing Amazon's hand so it is capitalism.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  3. as a last-resort by nimbius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    https://boingboing.net/2018/09... this was done to short-circuit the high likelyhood of unionization at Amazon factories, which could then risk spreading to the corporation as a whole (unionized developers, SRE's, managers.)

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  4. How come... by Comboman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How come no one worries about inflation due to the constantly rising wages of CEOs and Wall Street douche-bags? How come no one worries about inflation due to tax breaks for the wealthy? It's a specious argument anyway, since the employees will have minimal extra spending money to drive inflation. The difference will be that all their money is coming from their employer instead of their wages being subsidized by government programs like foodstamps.

    --
    Support Right To Repair Legislation.
  5. Re:A living wage for workers? by AuMatar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, its the threat of government intervention like the tax mentioned that would likely cost it more in the end. Don't get me wrong, I'm happy with this result. But don't pretend they would have done this absent the likelihood of higher penalties.

    --
    I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
  6. Re:A living wage for workers? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No, its the threat of government intervention like the tax mentioned

    There is little chance of government intervention, and ZERO chance of Bernie's idiotic tax on hiring poor people.

  7. Prices only really rise by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    in response to wage gains if there aren't matching productivity gains. We've doubled productivity in the last 20 years while wages remained the same or went down. There is a _lot_ of room for wage growth and better standards of living in America.

    If I may rant a bit here, I do wish we could get rid of this pernicious lie that raising wages is pointless because it just means prices will go up. It's so obviously wrong on the face of it. If such a thing were true we'd never have gotten out of the gilded age.

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

    Oh FFS, no one trusted Obama at all, and basically held on to their money and invested as little as possible because the risk was high with the Obomber in charge. Jesus man.

  9. As long as productivity is going up by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    price inflation isn't an issue. And productivity has doubled in the last 20 years and continues to climb (thanks to computers, better software and automation).

    If anything we need shorter work weeks and higher pay to absorb job losses due to increased productivity. At my job it's been the same 3 man team for 15 years (with folks coming and going here and there) and our user base continues to increase. We haven't had to hire more because the software keeps improving so there's less to break, keeping the amount of work pretty consistent even as the number of users we support climbs.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  10. Re:A living wage for workers? by sjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You mean at an age where we don't believe they are mature enough to vote, make decisions about cigarettes and alcohol, or enter into binding contracts?

    What's next from you? Making people carry through with what they said they wanted to be when they were four years old?

    What of people who were doing everything "right" who got derailed by circumstances beyond their control? Or does that not exist in your odd little world?

  11. Re: A living wage for workers? by datavirtue · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is going to clobber thier retail competition during the holidays. This is enough to put a lot of them out of business. They are fucked.

    --
    I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
  12. Re:A living wage for workers? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What of people who were doing everything "right" who got derailed by circumstances beyond their control?

    An obvious way to help these people is to make it EASIER for employers to hire them and give them a chance to turn their lives around. For instance, the EITC is an effective program that has helped millions of people earn enough to support their families.

    But Bernie's poverty tax does the exact opposite. It penalizes companies for hiring the people most in need of a job. It is an insanely stupid proposal, and I can't believe that anyone takes it seriously.

    It is a myth that "low pay" is a significant cause of poverty. The real problem is NO PAY. Only 9 percent of adults living below the poverty line work full time.

    If Amazon hires a poor single mother, it is idiotic to say that somehow Amazon "caused" her to be poor. The truth is, that by giving her a job, they are helping her take the first step out of poverty. Punishing them for doing so makes no sense.

    Poverty is a difficult societal problem, and we should all bear the cost of alleviating it. Dumping the cost onto the companies that are providing much needed entry level jobs, and thus disincentivizing them from doing so, is counter-productive.

  13. Re:A living wage for workers? by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So basic income it is. Easier to administer and actually closes the gap. It also avoids rewarding employers for paying less than the work is worth and expecting the rest of society to pay enough to keep their workers from dropping dead.

    Or were you thinking of lowering the minimum wage to a penny because surely working 80 hours a week for a cheeseburger will help get people out of poverty.