
Amazon asks workers sheltering at home to return or request leave - pseudolus
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-24/amazon-asks-workers-sheltering-at-home-to-return-or-seek-leave
======
jonknee
Direct from the source, here is what Amazon is doing:

[https://blog.aboutamazon.com/company-news/how-amazon-
priorit...](https://blog.aboutamazon.com/company-news/how-amazon-prioritizes-
health-and-safety-while-fulfilling-customer-orders)

> We’ve extended the increased hourly pay outlined below through May 16. We
> are also extending double overtime pay in the U.S. and Canada. These
> extensions increase our total investment in pay during COVID-19 to nearly
> $700 million for our hourly employees and partners. In addition, we are
> providing flexibility with leave of absence options, including expanding the
> policy to cover COVID-19 circumstances, such as high-risk individuals or
> school closures. We continue to see heavy demand during this difficult time
> and the team is doing incredible work for our customers and the community.

~~~
falcolas
None of this really disagrees with the article; it's an issue because people
typically on a leave of absence don't get paid (notice the lack of "paid
leave").

~~~
jonknee
I never said it did? The article is behind a paywall and is based off this
blog post which is not behind a paywall.

~~~
Jaepa
No, but saying look at all they're doing without addressing kind of the key
part of the article does kind of miss the point, and makes your response seem
more like a response from PR then a comment on the text.

~~~
bhupy
I genuinely would like to make sure I'm not missing something: what's the "key
part of the article" that's missing from the Amazon press release?

~~~
catach
The key part, from an Amazon warehouse worker perspective, is that they're not
extending the unlimited unpaid time off option. Huge loss in scheduling
flexibility.

~~~
bhupy
From the press release:

“If any team members are unable or unwilling to work a scheduled shift, they
can use unlimited unpaid time off through the month of April without penalty,
and we are supportive if someone chooses to stay home.”

~~~
dsr_
Unlimited unpaid time off... for the next seven days. Even a cable company
would blush at using "unlimited" like that.

------
crazygringo
> _Amazon said earlier this month it had hired an additional 100,000
> employees_

Not the main point of the article, but can I just say that's _huge_. That's...
the same size as Google's _entire_ full-time workforce.

Granted they're low-skill warehouse positions, not highly paid engineering
jobs, but still.

The ability of a company to hire _one hundred thousand people in a month_ is
absolutely insane.

~~~
jonknee
Even crazier, they have already announced an additional 75,000 openings. Just
nuts.

~~~
bhupy
As of 2019, Amazon employed 798,000 employees, so we're looking at almost 1
million people, earning $15/hour at a minimum, with 401(k), health, vision,
and dental benefits. Absolutely nuts.

~~~
vadym909
I'd be really surprised if these were real- '401(k), health, vision, and
dental benefits'. Anyone can offer 401k without matching, medical without
contributing to the premium.

~~~
kevindong
Amazon publishes this page detailing the benefits + their per-paycheck costs
[0]. The prices for the coverage received seem very reasonable.

[0]: [https://www.amazon.jobs/en/landing_pages/benefitsoverview-
us](https://www.amazon.jobs/en/landing_pages/benefitsoverview-us)

~~~
vadym909
Ah ok- I stand corrected - the medical is pretty reasonable. The 401k match
takes 3 years to vest.

------
replyguy912
This seems reasonable and beyond what other major employers are offering, but
as is the fashion I'm sure Amazon will be convicted in the court of public
interwebs shortly...

~~~
kevingadd
What's a few avoidable deaths between friends, after all?

There are multiple active outbreaks in crowded factories and other facilities,
just like an Amazon fulfillment warehouse. They do not have necessary safety
equipment and procedures in place yet. Forcing people to show up to work under
these conditions is murder. They could fix it, though.

A starting point would be Amazon providing tests and ensuring that everyone
has been tested before returning to work, along with ensuring everyone has
masks and gloves and enough time to thoroughly wash their hands throughout
their shift. Press reports up until this point and complaints from employees
suggest none of that is consistently the case.

~~~
jonknee
From their post on the topic it sounds like you should be happy with their
plan:

[https://blog.aboutamazon.com/company-news/how-amazon-
priorit...](https://blog.aboutamazon.com/company-news/how-amazon-prioritizes-
health-and-safety-while-fulfilling-customer-orders)

> Millions of masks have been distributed across our network. They are
> available to all Amazon associates, delivery service partners, Amazon Flex
> participants, seasonal employees, and Whole Foods Market stores employees.
> We are encouraging everyone to take and use them.

As for testing, they have been unable to do it through regular channels so
they are building a lab to do it themselves:

> An important safety step might be regular testing of all employees for
> COVID-19, including those without symptoms. We have begun assembling
> equipment we need to build our first lab to process tests and hope to start
> testing small numbers of our frontline employees soon.

As for cleanliness:

> We have increased the frequency and intensity of cleaning at all sites,
> including regular sanitization of door handles, handrails, touch screens,
> scanners, and other frequently touched areas.

> Our enhanced cleaning has added almost 200 additional points of contact per
> site across our janitorial teams, and we’ve increased the size of our
> cleaning teams threefold to support our buildings.

> We require everyone to wash their hands often with soap and water for at
> least 20 seconds, especially after using the bathroom and before eating, as
> well as after blowing their nose, coughing, or sneezing. If soap and water
> are not readily available, alcohol-based hand sanitizer stations are easily
> accessible throughout our buildings.

> In addition to break times, employees can log out of their system to wash
> their hands whenever they choose, without worrying about impact on their
> performance goals.

~~~
kevingadd
Credit for the effort, but it has been a consistent issue over the last month
and employees are still voicing concerns.

[https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/04/21/enough-
enough-l...](https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/04/21/enough-enough-
largest-strike-yet-amazon-workers-call-sick-over-unsafe-working#)

Once the vast majority of employees say it's actually fixed I'll give Amazon
real credit for it, but it's empty PR until then.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
This article mentions 300 people, which isn't a very big fraction of Amazon
employees. I'm sure some employees who aren't participating sympathize, but
what number would convince you that the "vast majority" think it's fine?

------
claudeganon
There’s no greater demonstration of their internal class divide than what
would happen if they asked HQ employees to stop working from home and do the
same.

~~~
looping__lui
... force people whose job can be done from home to go to the office for the
sake of “solidarity” !?

~~~
kirykl
In some large (and dysfunctional) companies the solidarity, handshaking, and
hob nobbing has become the actual work, and it can’t be done from home

~~~
looping__lui
LOL

------
ggm
Rapid surges in hiring are often accompanied by harder negotiation stances in
pay and condtions since new hires have not had time to socialise or organise
and hence unionise.

Bezos is notoriously opposed to organised labour. I think this surge implies a
fight, and a long one.

~~~
wasdfff
No one getting hired to work in an amazon warehouse is negotiating anything
beyond what shifts they will be picking up.

~~~
ggm
Once you have an established contract and term of employment, organising for
better working conditions is the next step. Or perhaps your preference is a
perpetual marginalised and casual workforce?

------
ineedasername
Are you eligible for unemployment on such a leave?

Also, I don't fault Amazon for limiting paid-leave if the worker isn't sick,
but it's only reasonable to ask people to come in if they are given decent
PPE. Temperature checks are insufficient for a virus that may have a large #
of asymptomatic carriers and a lengthy pre-symptomatic period for many that
get sick.

------
mportela
Without the paywall: [https://outline.com/YnuzdH](https://outline.com/YnuzdH)

------
flyGuyOnTheSly
How long until Amazon's warehouses are 100% fully robotic?

Or 99% fully robotic? (With a small team of managers to check in on the
robots)

~~~
travbrack
I'm curious what the percentage is right now.

~~~
mcqueenjordan
You can go tour one. The robotics are pretty impressive.

It reminded me of the scenes in Beauty and the Beast where the teapots and
brooms and candlesticks were all orchestrated together to clean up/set the
table/etc.

~~~
flyGuyOnTheSly
I wasn't aware amazon warehouse tours were an option...

I think I'll plan one for when we're out of lockdown in my area.

Thanks for the outing idea!

------
disambiguation
I'm curious what Amazon warehouse worker is going to take this deal when
there's free state and federal government checks being dished out.

~~~
TomMckenny
Have you quit your job to collect these allegedly easy to obtain checks? Or is
this character flaw exclusive to warehouse workers?

~~~
wutbrodo
Obviously you wouldn't quit your job if it pays a lot higher than the new
unemployment payouts, and/or if you can easily work from home...and nobody but
you is claiming that it's a character flaw to choose not to risk your life
working if you have the safety net to avoid doing so.

This is a really bizarre, immature reaction to a discussion of the incentives
trade-off at play here.

~~~
TomMckenny
I'm not addressing the extremely wise decision that a government make it
financially possible for people not to spread disease. Nor disputing that the
vast majority of people are willing to do this under these extreme
circumstance.

I'm addressing the assumption, wrapped in theories about incentives, that
everyone (strangely except any persons expounding the theory) is eager to quit
work for "welfare" at the first opportunity. And, by extension, that this is
why there must never be a social safety net that can keep anyone alive.
Because, according to this demonstrably false theory, society would collapse.

People do not quit their jobs to receive handouts exactly because of their
principles and because they are not the cynical robots that theoreticians make
them out to be. Corporations may maximize wealth regardless of harm to society
or others but the vast majority of natural persons don't.

~~~
wutbrodo
> I'm addressing the assumption, wrapped in theories about incentives, that
> everyone (strangely except any persons expounding the theory) is eager to
> quit work for "welfare" at the first opportunity

Again, the GP comment didn't say or imply anything like this. You're just
accusing random commenters of irrelevant thoughtcrime based on trying to fit
into every square peg into the round hole of the same vacuous political
gamesmanship that dominates most conversations that touch on the economy.
Paying attention to incentives doesn't at all imply that you think it's a
moral failing for someone to follow incentives. In fact, I'd imagine that it's
quite the opposite: people who get hysterical at the sight of rational,
apolitical discussion are infinitely more likely to weight descriptions of
incentives with moral dimensions that they don't have or need.

This is what it looks like when people are actually interested in trying to
understand the economic situation, without immediately having to snap into us-
vs-them political gamesmanship. HN isn't perfect, but it's at least better
than that; Go to /r/politics or something if that's what you're interested in.

~~~
TomMckenny
If the top comment is a genuine question with neutral tone then so is the
similarly phrased "When will Republicans start mass arrests of journalist?" I
don't explicitly state a value judgement and I can follow up with "you can't
blame them for acting in their self interest". Yet claiming it is a neutral
question would obviously be mistaken.

Likewise the claim that "following incentives is excusable" includes, among
other hidden assumptions, that it is actually happening and that there is
actually an incentive. It is obfuscation in both cases. It certainly does not
make the question an economic one.

I don't see anything above accusing anyone of thoughtcrime. I assume this is a
shibboleth used to dismiss political opponents, end conversation and instruct
fellow travelers what opinion to have on the mater. At any rate, I'd be more
concerned about thought police from a leader who purges anyone who disagrees
with him[1] than a random internet voice.

[1]The most recent being: [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/22/us/coronavirus-
live-cover...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/22/us/coronavirus-live-
coverage.html)

------
neonate
[https://archive.md/rY2I6](https://archive.md/rY2I6)

------
say_it_as_it_is
Cannot trust Bloomberg Media to report facts.

------
_understood_
*paywall

~~~
flyGuyOnTheSly
Just disable javascript if you're seeing a bloomberg paywall, the article
should still read fine.

~~~
qorrect
Well hey!

------
speedgoose
> The company has said criticisms of its safety measures are unfounded.

Well, the French justice forced them to improve their safety measures. They
had to close down for 5 days to do so. I don't remember reading about them
doing that worldwide. However, I do remember them complaining in emails sent
to their French customers that they are forced to improve the safety measures
and that the French justice is not nice. It was a bit ridiculous and not well
received.

~~~
strictnein
That's not what happened at all.

The French imposed very arbitrary guidelines on only delivering "essential"
goods and they had to stop all deliveries to address them

All these "essential" good definitions are complete nonsense anyways. What one
person deems unnecessary can be very, very necessary to someone else.

~~~
speedgoose
I do really disagree.

This is a source from today :
[https://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2020/04/24/coronavir...](https://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/2020/04/24/coronavirus-
la-justice-confirme-en-appel-le-rappel-a-l-ordre-d-amazon_6037670_3234.html)

~~~
strictnein
Which says what I said.

They shut down because they needed to figure out what was meant by the
"essential" order. The fine was too large to do anything but pause operations.

> On April 15, the online store preferred to close its six large French
> warehouses, ensuring that it had no other choice, given the amount of the
> penalty. "How to precisely define food, hygiene or medical products?" "
> Asked the business.

~~~
speedgoose
They have a list. But anyway, why are they restricted to "essential" orders
only? To improve the safety of the Amazon employees.

------
ck2
This is going to be like the 9/11 first responders where they had to beg for
health care and health insurance for the rest of their lives.

We have no idea what the lifetime implications are for someone getting sick.
Put lifetime healthcare coverage with no cap in their contract. What are they
going to somehow be "too healthy" ?

------
uoaei
> These extensions increase our total investment in pay during COVID-19 to
> nearly $700 million for our hourly employees and partners.

This is a drop in the bucket for Amazon. They are able to pay much better but
do not. If the savings were being passed onto the customers, that's one thing,
but with all the recent news about Amazon's practices, it's easy and
convenient to take the cynical route.

~~~
jonknee
What dollar figure would make you happy?

~~~
uoaei
Not talking about it in absolute terms. How about talking about it in terms of
median wage per job title? Putting big numbers in glitzy blog posts only
serves to dazzle and obfuscates how easy it would be for Amazon to double or
triple that number with basically no dent in the wallet from doing so.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
You think Amazon could spend an extra $700 million to $1.4 billion with
"basically no dent in the wallet"? I guess I understand why you're frustrated
if you think that's the case, but it's just not true.

~~~
jointpdf
Jeff Bezos owns 55.55M shares of Amazon stock
([https://www.secform4.com/insider-
trading/1043298.htm](https://www.secform4.com/insider-trading/1043298.htm)).
Since just April 1st, the value of that stock has increased by ~55.55M*($2400
- $1900) = $27.775B. I know net_worth != cash, but he can and routinely does
(see link above) liquidate stock to fund other projects.

In this context, I think $700M is equivalent to a coin tossed in a fountain.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
That's fair. This cashflow is obviously not available to Amazon directly, but
I could see an argument that Jeff Bezos specifically ought to make more funds
available. (Maybe he will - if you believe the headlines he was entirely
hands-off the retail business until recently.)

