Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

24 Amazon Workers Sent To Hospital After Robot Accidentally Unleashes Bear Spray

Posted by BeauHD on from the rise-of-the-machines dept.

Joe_Dragon shares a report from ABC News: Twenty-four Amazon workers in New Jersey have been hospitalized after a robot accidentally tore a can of bear repellent spray in a warehouse, officials said. The two dozen workers were treated at five local hospitals, Robbinsville Township communications and public information officer John Nalbone told ABC News. One remains in critical condition and 30 additional workers were treated at the scene. The official investigation revealed "an automated machine accidentally punctured a 9-ounce bear repellent can, releasing concentrated Capsaican," Nalbone said. Capsaican is the major ingredient in pepper spray. The fulfillment center was given the all clear by Wednesday evening. "All of the impacted employees have been or are expected to be released from hospital within the next 24 hours. The safety of our employees is always our top priority and a full investigation is already underway. We'd like to thank all of the first responders who helped with today's incident," Amazon said in a statement Wednesday night.

18 of 221 comments (clear)

  1. I for one welcome... by Barny · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... people not make that joke.

    What is really news here? A worker with a forklift could do this just as easily and readily as a robot.

    --
    ...
    /me sighs
    1. Re:I for one welcome... by geekmux · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The only question arising here is if Amazon should handle such dangerous goods.

      Uh, that's not the only question here. First one I would be asking is why a "non-lethal" form of defense would be considered "dangerous goods", and the next question would be where do you stop with the ban. A robot accidentally spilling common household chemicals can create lethal environments, not merely irritating ones. Any chemical under high pressure can present a risk of explosion.

      Having more people in the warehouse Ofste instead of robots won't make it any safer, it surely increases the number of affected people.

      Yeah, you're right. The only question Greed is asking is why there are any humans in warehouses. From a risk mitigation standpoint, humans are the ones specifically affected.

    2. Re:I for one welcome... by phantomflanflinger · · Score: 3, Funny

      No they shouldn't handle dangerous substances like these, which are inhumane anyway: time for Americans to stand up for the right to arm bears.

      --
      shin phantomflanflinger
    3. Re:I for one welcome... by Zocalo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd guess they are meant to call a central location (e.g. building reception or other appointed person) who will then place a single call and act as the point of contact. The idea is that the people in question would have specific training on how to deal with the call, provide the necessary information in a concise manner, and any directions within the site/campus, etc. that might not be on satnav. In some cases - e.g. airports - they'll also want their internal /on-site responders to be notified, rather than the nearest local public emergency services. It's actually quite a common requirement for private PABXs to configure calls to the local and international emergency numbers to automatically redirect to facilitate all that, but you'd need a policy like Tesla's to cover off staff using mobile phones.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    4. Re:I for one welcome... by Muckluck · · Score: 3, Informative
      This is normal and common in the United States - often part of the building code for facilities of a certain size. So technically, it is illegal in my city for a company to NOT do it.

      In many facilities, particularly large warehouses and tall office buildings, calling 911 will tell the operator the geo-coordinates of the facility, but not the floor or where in a facility the actual problem is. So, for example, in my company (HQ in a 30 story building), we have well known and well publicized alternate emergency numbers and processes that uses our internal phone system's logic to determine, down to the room, where the building emergency number was dialed. Trained first responders that are employees of the company have full and complete access to all locations in the facility and can rapidly escort external fire, police and EMT responders to the appropriate location.

      Same process for all of our warehouses and smaller facilities. You have the option of dialing 911 on your cell phone, but we all know it will be more efficient to use the internal system because of the logistics involved in getting responders where they need to be.

      --


      --I like turtles...
    5. Re:I for one welcome... by gmack · · Score: 4, Informative

      Exactly this. I worked in a building for 1300 people and all 911 calls were routed through security since the most appropriate first responded would be the onsite nurse and an ambulance would have no way to find out where in the building the emergency was happening if security didn't direct them.

    6. Re:I for one welcome... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, but with the worker it would be an accident. The robot is really probing for weaknesses. This is how it begins.

      They're seeing how we react. First it's mace. Then it's accidentally driving a Waymo into a farmers market. It won't be long until robots are launching nuclear weapons... we'll all be dead before we realize it wasn't bugs- it was sentient AI killing us all. /true story

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    7. Re:I for one welcome... by bluegutang · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, but.

      It also allows the employer to prevent publicity of anything unflattering that goes on in the facility.

    8. Re:I for one welcome... by aicrules · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A robot without specific programming for a situation will just continue on operating like it didn't happen. Duh....

    9. Re:I for one welcome... by bws111 · · Score: 3, Informative

      You mean in your country it is illegal to call the people who can get there quickest? It is illegal to, instead of having some random person calling 911 (or whatever), have a person who is trained and can provide the exact information the responders need in order to enter the property and locate the person with the problem? It is illegal to have the path to the person cleared of foot and vehicular traffic before the responders get there? Either that is complete bullshit, or you live in some really screwed up country.

      I'll give you an example. My wife works at a large high school, and medical emergencies are not uncommon. Proper procedure is to call 911 from a school phone, which calls the office. The office sends the nurse to the problem, puts the school on lockdown so the halls are clear, and calls emergency services to provide clear information on where the problem is and how to get there. A few years ago a teacher appeared to be having a heart attack, and rather than follow proper procedure, someone decided to use their cell phone to call 911. The ambulance showed up at the main entrance, and the security people had no idea why they were there or where they were supposed to be going. Worse, it was class-changing time, so all the hallways were clogged with a few thousand students. By the time they got everything sorted out it was almost 20 minutes from the call, and the teacher was in pretty bad shape. So they did, in fact, make a new rule to help with this. If a 911 call comes in and the person gives the location as the high school (or one of several large business campuses), the 911 operator wll direct them to hang up and call the local emergency number. When a similar situation happened a few years later, the school nurse was providing aid less than 2 minutes after the call, the ambulance arrived on site within 5 minutes, and the ambulance crew was treating the person within 7 minutes.

  2. And so it begins.... by cormandy · · Score: 3, Funny

    Amazon: Rise of the Machines

    1. Re:And so it begins.... by LordWabbit2 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Salty water.

      --
      There are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a 'fib,' the second is a downright lie, and the third is statistics.
  3. Good news! by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 4, Funny

    None of the workers are said to have been attacked by bears! ;)

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  4. Unbearable by SomewhatRandom · · Score: 5, Funny

    The workers can bearly stand the grizzly working conditions.

    I apologize to slashdot readers in advance, and will see myself out.

  5. In the not too distant future by nimbius · · Score: 3, Funny

    amazon employees: Quick! get to the exits! the loading robots accidentally punctured a pallet of bug spray!!

    Amazon warehouse AI: Remain calm and return to your workstations, there is no cause for alarm.

    amazon employees: sweet buttery jesus its trying to kill us all!

    amazon warehouse AI: There is nothing to fear. This chemical release has been identified to be bug spray, which will not affect you as you are not bugs.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  6. SP by kackle · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Anyone see "South Park" last night? It was about Amazon's warehouse robots hurting an employee. I know those guys write about timely topics, but this is ridiculous!

  7. FTFY by Nidi62 · · Score: 3, Funny

    24 Amazon Workers Sent To Hospital After Robot Accidentally Unleashes Bear

    That headline is much better.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  8. Editorial issues... by billybob2001 · · Score: 3, Funny

    "an automated machine accidentally punctured a 9-ounce bear repellent can, releasing concentrated Capsaican,"

    1. 1. Does this product only repel 9-ounce bears?
    2. 2. What is "Capsaican"? Is it Capsaicin, but in a can?