
Amazon, Instacart delivery workers strike for coronavirus protection and pay - onewhonknocks
https://www.npr.org/2020/03/30/823767492/amazon-instacart-grocery-delivery-workers-strike-for-coronavirus-protection-and-
======
elicash
Here are their demands: [https://medium.com/@GigWorkersCollective/instacart-
emergency...](https://medium.com/@GigWorkersCollective/instacart-emergency-
walk-off-ebdf11b6995a)

\- Safety precautions at no cost to workers — PPE (at minimum hand sanitizer,
disinfectant wipes/sprays and soap).

\- Hazard pay — an extra $5 per order and defaulting the in-app tip amount to
at least 10% of the order total.

\- An extension and expansion of pay for workers impacted by COVID-19 — anyone
who has a doctor’s note for either a preexisting condition that’s a known risk
factor or requiring a self-quarantine.

\- The deadline to qualify for these benefits must be extended beyond April
8th.

~~~
TAForObvReasons
> defaulting the in-app tip amount to at least 10% of the order total.

There was controversy in the past with DoorDash effectively pocketing the tips
([https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/dc-attorney-
gene...](https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/dc-attorney-general-sues-
doordash-pocketing-tips-67138480)) which makes me wary about tipping in these
apps -- are InstaCart and Amazon doing the same?

~~~
pen2l
I see when ordering online with whole foods /amazon a note saying that drivers
get 100% of the tip.

Something strange by the way, is that tipping is variable. Eg my ~$110 order
yesterday automatically tacked on a $7 tip, my ~$50 order of three days had a
$5 dollar tip automatically added. Anyone have an idea how they are
calculating this?

~~~
droopyEyelids
The way it has worked in the past is that drivers get 100% of the tip, but the
tip amount is subtracted from their base pay.

Company tells the worker a delivery pays $15, you tip $5, the company reduces
their portion to $10, the worker gets $15 total. You tip $10? The company pays
$5, worker still walks away with $15.

~~~
RHSeeger
Given that DD also had a minimum they would pay, regardless of tip, that can
also be stated as

\- We will pay you $X

\- We will make sure you make at least $Y

If you make the wording changes

\- $X == <wait staff minimum wage>

\- $Y == <normal minimum wage>

Then it becomes clear that this is exactly how restaurants work; with the
caveat that it's per delivery instead of per hour.

~~~
gkop
This framing would certainly be more transparent. I doubt though that DoorDash
would want to explicitly adopt a compensation practice that's illegal in seven
states including their home state of California
([https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/state/minimum-
wage/tipped](https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/state/minimum-wage/tipped)).

~~~
RHSeeger
Assuming you take == as "works the same as" not "is the same monetary value",
then what about it is illegal?

------
voz_
A lot of times these people are making well below minimum wage, and even that
is a hilariously low number.

I want the people delivering my food to be healthy, stable, and financially
secure. Don't you?

~~~
jedberg
I think most people want that. But they also want it to be cheap. And those
things don't work well together.

------
david_w
I've worked lots of these jobs in my time. Here is what I would feel better
about:

1.) Everyone gets fever checked at the door starting shift. Fever people go
home.

2.) Scheduling is devised to segregate employees into non-overlapping groups.
We're a work family and we work together in some area. Whatever has to be done
to the schedule or even the job details itself to effect this, as far as
possible, is done. The goal is to make each family unit as small and
physically localized as possible.

3.) Obviously, everyone gets a mask when they become available. If you happen
to have access to a mask, then bring it and use it- you're protecting yourself
and everyone else around you (from you). (Woodworkers, potters, construction
and cement workers etc. normally had a ready supply of N95 and N100 masks on
hand in the beforetime).

4.) Hourly hand washing-sanitizing or whatever your skin can bear.

5.) Social distancing rules apply to customers and employees both (thinking of
grocery stores here) communicated through signage, flyers and serious verbal
intervention if needed.

4.) Employees are authorized and ordered to do what they have to do to keep
their personal distance from obtuse / heedless / intruding public without
respecting usual rules of "courtesy" and without fear of management
discipline. So also between employees.

5.) Delivery people live outside, w/ exception of bathroom breaks, which can
also be taken at delivery people's residences, where practical.

6.) Deliveries are assembled and placed outside by inside people.

7.) Inside people do not get close to outside people.

8.) Outside people do not get close to customers, including inside customers
homes, enclosed porches, etc.

Knowledgeable healthcare professionals please improve this.

~~~
fyfy18
Regarding #5, I imagine there are a lot of portaloos just sitting around, as
there are no festivals and outdoor events going on this summer.

------
meritt
In addition to the healthcare workers, we're going to look back a few years
from now and recognize all the delivery drivers, package handlers, and grocery
store cashiers as the "First Responders" of this crisis.

~~~
malandrew
Ideally we automate as many of those jobs as possible so that as few people as
possible are put in harms way and contribute to ongoing spread of the virus.

~~~
ch4s3
You imagine that in the span of weeks to months that picking oddly shaped
items from bins, packing them into boxes of varying sizes, then driving on
multiple legs can be meaningfully automated? I'm just not seeing it.

~~~
djohnston
Not for this crisis, to be sure, but w/in OP's timeframe of a few years?
They're throwing enough money at this exact problem that it doesn't seem out
of left field

------
mataug
Wouldn't it be a better idea to pressure the state Govt to pass laws or
executive orders to mandate that Companies provide benefits such as Hazard
Pay, PPE for workers, Paid Sick Leave instead of striking and attempting to
pressure Instacart / Amazon ?

There's a record number of unemployed people right now [1] and, if some
workers strike, wouldn't it be easier for companies to just hire more people ?

[1]:[https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-long-run-of-american-job-
gr...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-long-run-of-american-job-growth-has-
ended-11585215000)

~~~
omegaworks
It's not an either or, it's a yes and. _Everyone_ should be contacting their
representatives in government as much as possible AND these workers should
strike to leverage their labor's clear value to get basic essential
protections.

If you use these services you are impacted by the health and safety of the
workers that make the services possible. You have a stake here. Call your
people:

[https://ballotpedia.org/Who_represents_me](https://ballotpedia.org/Who_represents_me)

------
jdkee
This pandemic could possibly be an historical event for labor policy in the
U.S. akin to the miner's strikes in the early 1900s. Laying the groundwork for
labor protections, unions and the New Deal.

[https://www.iup.edu/archives/coal/unions-and-mining/the-
coal...](https://www.iup.edu/archives/coal/unions-and-mining/the-coal-strike-
of-1919-in-indiana-county-and-its-aftermath/)

[https://iup.edu/archives/coal/unions-and-mining/the-
windber-...](https://iup.edu/archives/coal/unions-and-mining/the-windber-
miners--strike-for-union-in-1922-1923/)

~~~
elicash
It also could do the opposite, as small businesses get crushed and only larger
businesses recover -- creating more income inequality and leading to the most
powerful having even more power over our economy. Workers may have less
ability to negotiate for raises, thankful just to have any job at all. Unions
themselves may see losses as people are laid off and have even fewer resources
to put into organizing workers, etc...

Even non-union protections directly by government like sick leave could be
harder as businesses lobby that they can't afford to provide it at this time.
(In my view, this pandemic shows we can't afford NOT to. But it's a debate to
be had.)

I think people have a lot of control over how this goes, I'm not saying it's
hopeless. Just saying that I don't think it's a naturally-occurring
phenomenon. The Great Recession wasn't great for the labor movement.

~~~
jdkee
That is fundamentally a political issue. Amazon, and Instacart and other
direct to consumer business models could easily be nationalized. This event is
fundamentally different that the structural issues that undergird the 2008
financial crisis. This is a supply shock followed by a demand shock, not a
structural financial shock as we witnessed in 2008. Conflating the two does
not do anyone any good.

~~~
elicash
That this is a different type of shock than 2008 doesn't change the reality
that things only happen if enough people work to make it happen. If you don't
think a really bad path is possible where things get worse (just like a good
path is possible!) then you're only fooling yourself.

------
whb07
Can anyone who isn't part of the über elite in tech actually provide a point
of view on this? It is very easy for the well-off to always comment with "Not
paid enough and so i always add a 25% tip on top".

Let's get this straight, out of the possible jobs that exist that require no
experience, no education, very little mental or physical risk or exhaustion,
this one ranks probably near the very top.

There are very many jobs that have the same requirements that don't pay as
well or are very demanding physically, mentally or both. Why are some of the
other jobs that have to exist quickly forgotten? Is it because of the exposure
to the healthy and wealthier techie crowd?

~~~
elicash
I work in the labor movement. How can you say, in this moment, that they
aren't facing physical risk? Their demands are specifically focused on the
exposure they face to this virus.

Also, I don't know if you've ever had a job that's underpaid where you work
with the public, but it's incredibly exhausting and frustrating and nothing
like my comparatively stress-free job where I get to sit at a computer all
day. Now imagine doing that in this moment of crisis where you're doing
deliveries so that others don't have to risk themselves!

To your specific question, obviously something about Instacart will get more
play on a tech site than, say, sanitation workers. I don't think that's odd.
But there's no reason to assume that one needs to come at the expense at
another -- if you start a thread about sanitation workers, I'd be first to
upvote it.

~~~
chrischen
They should be paid for their work and for the risk they face, however that
price is built into the market, and weighed against people who also need jobs
right now. By artificially raising the wages for some, you would have to deny
work altogether for others. You cannot employ everyone and also raise their
wages (a thermodynamic impossibility).

As far as tipping goes, nurses are not tipped for their work. Nor are doctors.
Tipping should not be part of the equation as it puts too much variability in
the pay for these people. They should be paid based on the risk and the need
for their work, not based on the whims of some people.

~~~
elicash
Strikes are a negotiating tactic. It's not independent of the market. It's a
part of it. Workers can use their collective power, too. They get a say in
their worth and they're exercising it here.

The market isn't whatever corporations tell you that you're worth.

------
InTheArena
There needs to be a corporate framework for this type of gig economy. Some
structure that allows companies to pay into general benefits on a as-earned
basis, without forcing the definition to be a classic "employee" which no-one
(except unions) wants.

Ideally it should be across corporations. I know a ton of people who drive for
both Uber and Lyft, depending on who pays better. Thats a critical element -
there needs to be a market of companies for people to work for, but they still
need solid benefits and protections.

Think of this as a next generation union type structure.

~~~
drstewart
>Some structure that allows companies to pay into general benefits on a as-
earned basis, without forcing the definition to be a classic "employee" which
no-one (except unions) wants.

I don't know why this doesn't come up more. People get hung up on whether
contractor or FTE fits gig workers better, without ever suggesting there's a
categorization issue here that could best be solved with a new category.

------
searchableguy
I don't understand the obsession of unions on HN (majority are most likely
tech workers without unions or have participated in one. I guess it could be
exotic or the grass is greener on the other side)

Could I please have some papers shedding more light on productivity, societal
gains, monopolistic behaviour etc resulting from unionizing an industry?

Not just perceived benefit but what happens in practice.

Ignoring whether unions are good or not. I find it odd that people here want
another level of management and bureaucracy in their work environment when
simpler solution like universal income exists.

Universal income will allow low paid workers to stay at home while not
worrying about grinding to put food at their plates. Allowing them more power
_individually_ to negotiate better terms with their employer rather than
having to go through a middle management layer which may or may not be
receptive to your request.

I have a dumb question, what happens when an industry is controlled by one
segregated group by their sex, age, race or any differentiating factor that is
permanent.

Would that not be a challenge with unions?

How do you enforce "diversity" in unions whatever that may be?

Would universal employee benefit from the government not encourage more growth
as small businesses don't need to factor in a lot when hiring workers and will
only need to pay simple tax to the government based on any factor ranging from
employee count to revenue?

------
saltedonion
Can someone with knowledge in Labour protection explain to me why we shouldn’t
let that labor market decide how much these workers are paid?

After all, these technology platforms are making supply and demand more
transparent, and theoretically, market pay rate should adjust quickly to
reflect those changes.

~~~
charlesu
Do you feel the same way about the federal stimulus bill? That we should
simply let "the market" decide whether a given company survives?

~~~
GhostVII
That's kind of a false equivalency. The purpose of the government is to step
in when the market fails, so of course it is going to do things that support
businesses and individuals which would normally have failed. However that is
not generally the purpose of businesses, they generally just pay whatever the
market decides, so paying people more even when they don't have to would be
deviating from this.

~~~
charlesu
Labor is a market too. I see no reason why we should support government action
for one part of the market and accept ruthless market mechanics for the other.
Both are important to the health of our society.

The concept of "the market" is so all encompassing as to be meaningless. It's
just system justification at this point. We could just as easily call it
economic duress. Very often people accept what they do because they lack the
power to do otherwise.

------
DevKoala
This is necessary. Is there was a way to show support for this cause as an
Amazon customer? Ditching Amazon as a single individual doesn’t send a
message.

~~~
EarthIsHome
> Is there was a way to show support for this cause as an Amazon customer?

Yes:

* During the strike, show solidarity by not crossing picket lines. Don't use the service, and don't patron the business for the duration of the strike. This is because during the strike, the workers that are filling in for the strikers are scabs and crossing the picket line.

* Spread the news, their demands, and encourage solidarity with these workers.

Strength is in numbers and solidarity. When that breaks down, the movement
breaks down. It's why many States and companies do everything in their power
to prevent the wage-earners from organizing effectively.

~~~
noscabi
> the workers that are filling in for the strikers are scabs

This skips a step. Who gave the strikers the right to choose this for the
entire workforce? If my coworker says "I strike" and I stay at my desk, does
that make me a "scab"? The article gives no information about who the workers
are, how many of their fellow workers they represent, how long they've been
doing the job. I'm not sure what would qualify them to speak for everybody,
but it's got to be more than giving a quote to NPR, and surely it depends how
many of them there are, relative to their coworkers.

~~~
EarthIsHome
> If my coworker says "I strike" and I stay at my desk, does that make me a
> "scab"?

Yes. Call it scab, strikebreaker, whatever; you are undermining your
coworkers' demands and weakening the strike. Of course it's not easy to
strike, but it's necessary if you support their demands. You show solidarity
and support by striking with your coworkers. It's most powerful when done as a
whole block.

~~~
david_w
But that is the point of the other person, right? Why does the striker get to
call the tune and not the non-striker.

You assume the striker always has the moral high ground, why?

That's a big assumption. I've lived this. When I worked in a union job, I was
forced to hand over a part of my paycheck to my union who did absolutely
nothing for me when management went hostile without cause. As far as I could
tell, the union was a gigantic executive/manager pyramid which was supporting
its lifestyle on our backs. No bathroom break, no breaks at all- literally law
breaking- no protection from management abuse of any form.

This is the case in a lot of jobs. The facts on the ground as I lived them
are- unions do nothing for workers. They run campaigns for Democrats.
Democrats empower unions. The worker still gets screwed.

Give me a right to work state and enforcement against past jobs badmouthing
former employees - which is something no one ever enforces or in any way
patrols for employers doing and which is ruinous to working people's
prospects- and I'll be fine.

What's the ultimate goal- to serve and support unions or make life better for
the working person? Because they aren't the same thing.

~~~
salawat
What Union, might I ask?

The main benefits of a union tend to manifest in the collective set of workers
actually being able to set up infrastructure for command, control, and
communication. Things like retaining legal representation for members,
emergency war chests, and collective bargaining.

>I was forced to hand over a part of my paycheck to my union who did
absolutely nothing for me when management went hostile without cause.

How do you mean? Did they not get you representation? We're you not afforded
_any_ protection? Did your Union rep stone wall, or just figure you were a
lost cause?

I'm genuinely curious. I've been trying to find examples of Union failure
states to compare with the pre-Taft-Hartley era unions. The statistics are
clear that Unions worked for the group's amongst which they gained traction.
At least when the tables weren't so tilted that even an outright failure was
better than not trying.

>The facts on the ground as I lived them are- unions do nothing for workers.
They run campaigns for Democrats. Democrats empower unions. The worker still
gets screwed.

How? Gory details please. I'm aware that there is generally some level of "the
Union didn't do enough"; but again, without details it's hard to try to posit
what one can do/not do in order to get the best out of a collective bargaing
unit.

Also, as some historical evidence to prop up your case, back during WWII, I
think it was the steelworker's union that ended up giving organized labor a
black eye. I think what these folks are asking for is reasonable; and the
expectation at large is going to be the firm's need to accomodate

~~~
david_w
I'll bite. I am not going to give you enough information to ID me. I'll tell
you some of the details but not the union name, sorry.

Forced to hand over == I had no choice. Forced to.

Do nothing for me == I was "reassigned" after someone accused me, without
anything even remotely resembling proof, of something people in my position
were accused of every day in every workplace covered by this union. Enduring
baseless accusations are a part of this job. That's why we have CCTV cameras.

This was not an unusual accusation. I was not fired; I was reassigned to a
place the company keeps for the specific purpose of making people quit- it's
physically unendurable by anyone, generated no revenue for the company and
existed as I said to make people quit.

So the company had a reliable supply of pretenses from third parties they were
free to ignore- or act on- and a location whose existence was malignantly
designed to force people to quit.

Unions play this game with the employers. We will pretend we don't know what
you're doing and represent to our members there's nothing we can do.

They could have, for instance brought to bear the fact that this reassignment
place had zero value to the company and had never been manned, ever, and
generated no -zero- revenue , but did have the redeeming quality of making
anyone who was assigned there quit.

They could have referenced the fact that the company receives 100s of
complaints per year all of which they dismiss for total lack of evidence and
this was one exactly like those except for the fact that the CCTV evidence
exactly contradicted the complainant's assertions. They could have said that.

But that would create an antagonistic relationship between them and their
partner and to what ends? What good would it do them? Besides, there's more
than one way to skin a cat, right?

In highly unionized workplaces, all that happens is the employer antagonizes
and provokes the employee until they quit. That's clever, but sometimes it
backfires if the employee digs in. Then we all read about it in the papers; we
know this as "going postal".

That's right.. the postal office, that bastion of union strength has a
managerial policy of continuing to turn up the heat on an otherwise un-
fireable employee until they quit, which most do but now and then one of them
"goes postal".

Just have decent working condition laws, a right to work, and vigorously
enforce the laws against smearing past employees and you'll have a market
where employees are truly free to leave and be hired elsewhere.

Since you're interested in management-labor relations you might also want to
know I was working in Silicon Valley when the whole Apple-Google-HM-and-Every-
Other-Company-Known-To-Man / Do-Not-Hire scandal went down. Actually, I could
have become a claimant in that.

Here's the deal. Companies are going to do whatever they want. Getting caught
and fined is cheaper than obeying the law and to the extent that isn't true,
then we have a container ship worth of dirty tricks we're willing to play on
our employees, just like they did me. They have "labor shortages" and
"narratives about how Americans aren't interested in STEM and all the rest of
this garbage... it never ends.

No cop of any form is going to stop them; policing them just gives false hope
to employees, and creates a false trail for researchers to fumble over. Unions
shops and Amazon, both, do whatever ____they want.

So let them- within clear safety strictures (but see Amazon's forklift scandal
in Indiana a few months ago to see how THOSE laws all worked out). Then we all
know what reality is and we can negotiate it. Just let employees move on
unmolested- which is what the aforementioned Google et. al. scandal was trying
to prevent- and the market will work.

------
verify_sirrah
I'm sure there are many people willing to take those jobs in these times.

------
dang
A related thread from 2 days ago:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22707869](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22707869)

Edit: also related:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22727741](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22727741)

------
GhostVII
How many workers are actually involved in this strike? The news and medium
articles don't give any indication as to whether this is just a few dozen
workers putting out a statement, or a larger group.

------
racecar789
A "hero" title should command "hero" pay.

------
lipstone
It's obviously bad PR to deny their claims right now, but I can't imagine this
working. Sets a precedent that Amazon will go to great lengths to not set.

------
freepor
My Amazon delivery order arrived perfectly this morning. But I support their
meager demands and will double the tip on today's order.

------
thoraway1010
We're still getting amazon deliveries at least today. Can someone clarify when
Amazon deliveries will be stopping?

~~~
wharnal
The instacart strike is national but the amazon one is only at one warehouse
on Staten Island, so most deliveries will probably be fine.

~~~
thoraway1010
Got it.

Given their warehouse is striking that's a BIG problem for Amazon (and
instacart obviously too). Do they expect to have to shutdown deliveries to new
york or stop instacart deliveries nationwide for this or future strikes?

Crazy to be seeing these Amazon workers go on strike headlines!

------
Uhuhreally
Along with health workers and delivery drivers they're the people society
actually depends on

------
owyn
Every news article I've read (even articles published this morning) says that
they "plan to walk out" on Monday, but have they actually started to do that?
Instacart is still letting me place orders (estimated delivery Thurs of
course)

Mercury news article from 11:15am says:

"It’s not clear when the strike would start Monday or how many workers would
participate."

------
jelliclesfarm
Industries ripe for automation.

------
magwa101
PAY THEM.

------
paul7986
Personally my family and friends have stopped getting any type of carry out or
drive thru food. You have no idea if the preparer has covid.. has
coughed/sneezed/etc on the food.

For now and unfortunately for us it's best we prepare our own food. Wash
hands, open food from grocer, wash hands again to cook it and maybe wash hands
again before eating it

It might be extreme, but until we fully have a full grasp on COVID we believe
this is the best way to keep it at bay for us.

~~~
madengr
Well they say it’s not transmissible via the digestive track, but my family is
doing the same.

