I'm not going to cry over a high paid tech worker who gets treated poorly at Amazon. They have options and can take care of themselves. They still deserve fair treatment but they have options.

I'm more concerned about the person who has to choose between a government check and Amazon. The work enviornment needs to be good enough to make that choice an easy one.

There's a lot of philosophy involved here. I have a friend who owns a small business and his viewpoints are very similar to those of denis. He sees the transaction between him and his employees as a day's work for a day's pay. When that employee works that two week stretch and cashes that check, they're square. Granted, that's a business philosophy that America was built on. But it's one that is managed top down and controlled by the 1%.

I happen to see it a little differently. Every day a man works for another man he is (or should be) building long term capital. Number 2 of the 14 "leadership principles" of Amazon is "Ownership" for God's sake! I guess in the case of Amazon that means Jeff Bezos wants you to act like an owner without deriving any actual benefits of ownership.

If you don't want to field an email at 7 PM ever, maybe Jiffy Lube has a position for you.

JORR interesting take. Keep in mind, these folks have stock options, restricted stock, and bonus profit sharing plans. These employees are vested in the organization succeeding beyond one week's paycheck. I can't even begin to explain how vested I am in my division's profitability and company stock price. It makes a huge difference in my total pay.

For blue collar workers, it's a different discussion.

What part of your day doesn't your boss own?

I don't think that matters anyway. Just because a person has skills that allow them to command a $100,000 a year salary I don't think it gives an employer some right to control every hour of that worker's life.

Les Grobstein's huge hog is proof that God has a sense of humor, isn't it?

Why is anyone championing for someone that does not want to be championed for? I read most of the article, and it seemed to focus on well-off, salaried office workers. Happy workers. If you accept the offer and take the job, then one has to assume you did your due diligence. If you did not, and find that the salary and benefits aren't worth your effort, or that you aren't cut out for the job, quit and go do something else.

This isn't slavery. Not one worker is forced to work at Amazon.

"Oh, but IMU, this is the company that offered them the most money!"

Well, did you think you didn't have to do anything for a generous salary? If you don't want to field an email at 7 PM ever, maybe Jiffy Lube has a position for you.

No one is forcing anyone to stay in a job.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

Les Grobstein's huge hog is proof that God has a sense of humor, isn't it?

I would not consider this slavery because there appears to be little in the way of oppression. It does appear to be a pretty demanding job, both in terms of time and performance. The rewards are great and the workers have some skin in the game thus they are not technically slaves. It does not appear to be the type of setup that one would make into a career long choice, but it definitely appears to be a good short term option.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

I would not consider this slavery because there appears to be little in the way of oppression. It does appear to be a pretty demanding job, both in terms of time and performance. The rewards are great and the workers have some skin in the game thus they are not technically slaves. It does not appear to be the type of setup that is conducive for making into one's career, but it definitely appears to be a good short term option.

Capitalism is only very reluctantly anti-slavery.

For good reason we associate slavery in the Americas with black people. But capitalists don't give a fuck about the color of the worker's skin. Those Asians kids can sew shoes all night. It's how much they can squeeze out of him and how cheaply they can do it.

Any "benefit" provided to a worker is not done out of kindness or largesse, but rather to get the most production from said worker. And that's what's so disturbing about Amazon- their philosophy that the "right way" is to ride the worker as hard as possible. And you see the success of Amazon. When other companies begin to adpot these methods and philosophies, then maybe people will see it as the slavery it is.

The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.

Capitalism is only very reluctantly anti-slavery.

For good reason we associate slavery in the Americas with black people. But capitalists don't give a fuck about the color of the worker's skin. Those Asians kids can sew shoes all night. It's how much they can squeeze out of him and how cheaply they can do it.

Any "benefit" provided to a worker is not done out of kindness or largesse, but rather to get the most production from said worker. And that's what's so disturbing about Amazon- their philosophy that the "right way" is to ride the worker as hard as possible. And you see the success of Amazon. When other companies begin to adpot these methods and philosophies, then maybe people will see it as the slavery it is.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

I'm not placing this is in a racial context. Slavery has existed in every society. However this is not oppression which is a precondition of slavery. This situation is not akin to what occurs in the sweatshops of Asia. There are no human rights violations present. There is a demanding owner that has high expectations for his workers, but by all accounts they are provided a hefty salary for their services.

Once again, you can't say someone "has a choice to leave" if unemployment exists. For some jobs, you have a choice to leave. There is a fairly large portion of society that has no other option or any other option is just as bad as the current one.

It's like telling someone who lives in a bad neighborhood to just move. Just because you have options doesn't mean everyone else does.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

And that's what's so disturbing about Amazon- their philosophy that the "right way" is to ride the worker as hard as possible.

Les Grobstein's huge hog is proof that God has a sense of humor, isn't it?

It's like telling someone who lives in a bad neighborhood to just move. Just because you have options doesn't mean everyone else does.

That's because, for whatever reason, you identify with the owner rather than the worker.

WHY DO YOU HATE SUCCESS, JORR? seriously, where does it say in the constitution that employers owe their employees some shiny happy life with lots of money and free time so they can go live an interesting life? last i checked companies are only beholden to the owner/s and/or shareholders and thus their #1 function is to MAKE MONEY. their function/purpose isnt to take a bunch of employees and give them some idyllic life/style where they're shiny happy people.... the job is what it is. IT HAS TO DO WHATEVER IT HAS TO DO TO MAKE THE MOST MONEY POSSIBLE. if what they're offering the employee isnt good enough for the employee than s/he has the right to leave and go find another job where they can try to get whatever they want. there's no "slavery" here like they HAVE to work for amazon/whoever is paying them peanuts with these horrible pro-business policies... they're free to leave whenever they want and hey whaddya know i bet you there's 500 other people just itching and twitching to get that job because the market isnt what it once was awhile back.

if you keep saddling businesses with this downright pedantic responsibility to essentially giftwrap the american dream and hand it to their workers all willy nilly, then we're going to keep losing more and more companies/jobs to china and other nations that "get" international capitalism and then there will only be menial service jobs here for everyone, and nowhere near enough to go around. now while i'm obviously for a culling of the herd (if you will) because i'm set and the eugenics movement can go kill off a bunch of "them", still, thats what we're going to need if we scare away companies to china/elsewhere by demanding they become unprofitabl enterprises because they HAVE to give their employees that giftwrapped american dream.

FDR had the new/square-deal, right? that "social contract" where it said if you graduate high school keep your nose clean and work hard you too can have the american dream? well go figure that guy was a cripple and thus always looking for a handout. i swear to god man it's like you proto-hippies want to destroy the world as we know it so everyone can be technically equal living in a field with 0 industry.... that's not how the real world works, son. you should try living or even WORKING in it sometime when you're not too busy frolicking around with your "partner" =P

THE PRECEDING POST BROUGHT TO YOU BY..... SARCASM! really FUCKING great since 1604!

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

I believe the square deal was Teddy R. New deal was FDR.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

It's an unhealthy work environment no doubt. The potential for burnout is great. It's not oppressive though.

yeah, selling a house and moving out of a bad neighborhood is totally the same thing as switching jobs

I think it is oppressive though. The whole "you don't have to work there then" is libertarian bullshit.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

Most of my moves have been easier than the process of switching jobs.

The point is that not everyone has the option of switching jobs, especially those who are at the low end of the income spectrum.

That should be its own thread right there.


The reverence some people hold for "business"...any business is peculiar to me.