
Amazon fires worker who led strike over virus - blago
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-30/amazon-worker-who-led-strike-over-virus-says-company-fired-him
======
BoiledCabbage
Here is the key point Amazon claims he was exposed to the worker on March
11th. Over the weekened he said he is organizing a strike, so over the weekend
they order him and only him into quarantine. A full 18 days after his 5 min
exposure. From my reading of it, this almost certainly looks like retaliatory
action due to the strike, and a company using the excuse of quarantine to
cover it up.

Key excerpts from a much clearer article. And yet again, why you never 100%
believe a company's PR response when they're trying to cover themselves. They
tell just enough truth, but use it to intentionally mislead.

[https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/31/amazon-
strik...](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/31/amazon-strike-
worker-fired-organizing-walkout-chris-smallls)

> _According to the company’s previous statements, the infected co-worker in
> question last reported for work on 11 March. Had Smalls been exposed that
> day, a 14-day mandatory quarantine would have made him eligible to return as
> soon as 25 March._

> Smalls said Amazon did not send him home until _28 March, three weeks after
> the exposure._

> “No one else was put on quarantine,” he said, even as the infected person
> worked alongside “associates for 10-plus hours a week”.

> “You put me on quarantine for coming into contact with somebody, but I was
> around [that person] for less than five minutes,” he told Vice.

> According to Amazon, no one else was fired. Smalls said he was considering
> legal action, calling it “a no-brainer”.

~~~
Reedx
We should apply rigor to both sides. Each has incentive to cherry pick and
mislead.

> key point Amazon claims he was exposed to the worker on March 11th

Did they claim that? I'm looking for a source on this. "According to the
company’s previous statements, the infected co-worker in question last
reported for work on 11 March", but when you look at their linked source[1] it
says: "Amazon confirmed an associate, who reported for work on 11 March, has
since been diagnosed with Covid-19".

> “No one else was put on quarantine,” he said

Is this confirmed? You can't just assume this to be true. Pretty damning if
so, though.

> “You put me on quarantine for coming into contact with somebody, but I was
> around [that person] for less than five minutes,” he told Vice.

Viral transmission has no minimum timeline and often occurs at first point of
contact (e.g., handshake) or cough/sneeze at any time. Kind of irresponsible
to even print that quote without correcting the argument.

It may be that Amazon retaliated, but stuff like this doesn't prove it. We
need the hard facts. At this point it's unclear and sounds fishy on both
sides.

1\. [https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/mar/30/amazon-
wo...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/mar/30/amazon-workers-
strike-coronavirus)

~~~
joshuaellinger
I really hate it when people use he said/she said type arguments to pretend
that they are being objective and 'rigorous'.

There is a reason that the courts have something called 'burden of proof'.

When an individual worker does something a large company doesn't like and they
fire him, the burden of proof in my mind is on the company. Because HR has
professionals and if they can't tell a better story than what we are seeing,
then retaliation is the reason 90% of the time.

It isn't unclear. It is perfectly normal for companies to get rid of the
whistle blowers. That's why there are (weakly enforced) laws against it.

~~~
tidepod12
It's weird that you mention courts and then in the next sentence say this:

>the burden of proof in my mind is on the company

Because that is not how the courts operate. It is up to the person making the
accusation (which in this case is the employee accusing Amazon of an unjust
firing) to provide proof.

If you want to start dismissing all "he said/she said" arguments, then we
might as well shut down this entire thread. We are never going to get any
further than "he said/she said" unless someone in this thread has insider
knowledge of this situation and is willing to break privacy agreements.

~~~
fennecfoxen
> It is up to the person making the accusation (which in this case is the
> employee accusing Amazon of an unjust firing) to provide proof.

It's not necessarily either. It may very well simply be the preponderance of
the evidence. Nevertheless, such a suit will be undertaken with the benefit of
the discovery process.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_%28law%29](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_%28law%29)

~~~
tikiman163
Preponderance of the evidence is only used in arbitration, if he's suing then
this is litigation. In reality, if he has a contract requiring arbitration or
mediation instead of litigation then he has absolutely no power and no chance
of winning because arbitratators/mediators are always hired by the company.

Even discounting all of that, the judge/jury/arbitrator/litigator would have
to agree that sending him into quarantine and not others constitutes
retaliation. To be completely honest, this kind of job is a huge joke. If you
take too many bathroom breaks you won't hit your quota and they cN fire you
for that.

The only way to win isn't to prove he was treated inconsistently, that can be
ignored so long as the reason they stated for letting him go is true.

~~~
vikramkr
A quick google search says preponderance of the evidence is the standard of
proof for most civil cases, so your assertion that it is only used in
arbitration seems to be incorrect.

And arbitrators are always required to be agreed on by both parties.

------
ipsocannibal
Tech companies in general and Amazon specifically seem scared to death of
unionization. I think Amazon's actions in this matter are going to backfire
tremendously.

~~~
koheripbal
...and anyone who's had to work with a union can understand why.

~~~
ransom1538
My girlfriend worked at Macys. She was paid $14hr to do white collar admin
work and was in a "union". Each month we would walk a few blocks away downtown
to a small office. This is where we paid "dues". We couldn't pay online or
have it deduct from her check. The person we handed our check to would just
roll their eyes and throw her check into a pile of checks. She couldn't afford
these dues. The best part? You were required to be in the union.

The union helped Macys layoff thousands of workers including her with no
severance in a nice streamlined fashion. I am wrong, but this is what I
learned: Unions are basically fat cat organizations that leach hard working
people.

~~~
greendestiny_re
If your girlfriend was in a union, why do you say "we paid"?

~~~
effingwewt
I'm going to assune good faith here, maybe it's a cultural thing, who knows?

Regardless, here in the US it is typical for couples to form a partnership in
which both income and expenses are shared. Possibly the reason for the recent
emergence of the term 'Partner' to describe one's Significant Other.

~~~
greendestiny_re
I'm from Europe and it struck me as odd that the subject of the sentence
switched from singular to plural for no good reason.

>My girlfriend worked at Macys

>She was paid

>(She) was in a "union"

>Each month _we_ would walk

> _we_ paid "dues"

> _we_ couldn't pay online

> _we_ handed our check

>throw her check

I was just wondering if there was some hidden twist behind the change of
subject, so I asked bluntly.

------
LatteLazy
Devils advocate: if you're sent home on full pay and told not to come in, and
you come in, that's fireable (doubly so with coronavirus happening). If you do
that, you need some strong evidence that it's retaliation. You have away the
benefit of the doubt...

~~~
sudosysgen
Except when the only reason you're being told not to come in is to prevent you
from organizing a strike.

~~~
PunchTornado
no, that individual was exposed to someone confirmed positiv with covid-19.
one of the workers he worked with. both public and private sources confirmed
it to me.

if you ask me, that's a pretty dick move for someone. Can't you wait your
strike protest after your 14 days of quarantine? just 14 days.

~~~
sudosysgen
Why is he the only one being quarantined then? And from what I'm seeing, the
exposure was the 11th, so 14 days would already be up.

------
AndrewKemendo
Is the newsworthy claim that this firing was illegally retaliatory?

In other words, is the claim that Chris Smalls was being vocal in reporting
safety/health issues and was illegally fired as a result?

~~~
amazoniancrooks
It's the most likely explanation, despite Amazon's obfuscations.

~~~
koheripbal
Really? Because the employee admits that he went to work despite being exposed
to a covid-19 person, and despite being ordered not to.

Those facts are not even in dispute.

~~~
jhayward
He was exposed 18 days before he was ordered to quarantine. Please do not try
to say that there is some factual basis.

~~~
koheripbal
So? He did not get a covid-19 test, so for all Amazon knows, he's a carrier.
There are plenty of lightly-symptomatic people who are ill and contagious for
longer than 14 days.

~~~
fzeroracer
Weird how no one else around him was quarantined. If he was contagious, then
why didn't they quarantine everyone he was in contact with as well?

Maybe because it was bullshit and retribution on Amazon's part.

~~~
koheripbal
That is what _he_ claims. If you only believe one side of the story - then
obviously you'll side with that side.

------
kitanata
This is a union busting, anti-labor and retaliatory firing. It is illegal in
the United States.

Multiple employees have spoken out about the working conditions at Amazon's
warehouse facilities over the last couple of weeks. Common complaints include
a lack of protective equipment, sanitization, health monitoring, and working
"shoulder to shoulder". Workers are getting sick, and Amazon isn't properly
reporting the actual cases of COVID-19 at their facilities.

Source: [https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/26/amazon-warehouse-
employees-g...](https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/26/amazon-warehouse-employees-
grapple-with-coronavirus-risks.html)

Source: [https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/whole-foods-
amazon...](https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/whole-foods-amazon-
instacart-workers-to-strike-over-safety-concerns/ar-BB11VwT1)

Source: [https://www.thedailybeast.com/whole-foods-workers-to-
strike-...](https://www.thedailybeast.com/whole-foods-workers-to-strike-after-
amazon-instacart-employees-walk-out)

Mr. Smalls announced ahead of time that he was going to lead a general strike
at his facility in solidarity with the instacart and wholefoods strike on the
same day. This was reported in the media. Amazon knew this was being organized
and waited to fire the worker until after the planned protest strike occurred.

Source:
[https://apnews.com/cf27e9bec86d846447aad7e632484bea](https://apnews.com/cf27e9bec86d846447aad7e632484bea)

Here is Mr. Smalls talking about this in detail:
[https://www.cnbc.com/video/2020/03/30/staten-island-whole-
fo...](https://www.cnbc.com/video/2020/03/30/staten-island-whole-foods-
workers-walk-out-over-coronavirus-concerns.html) \- All he was asking for was
for the building to be sanitized after a confirmed case of COVID-19 occurred
at his facility, at Staten Island near the epicenter of the pandemic in the
United States in New York.

The attorney general of New York recognized this issue for what it is.

\---

New York Attorney General Letitia James said late Monday evening that "it is
disgraceful that Amazon would terminate an employee who bravely stood up to
protect himself and his colleagues."

"At the height of a global pandemic, Chris Smalls and his colleagues publicly
protested the lack of precautions that Amazon was taking to protect them from
COVID-19," she said. "Today, Chris Smalls was fired. In New York, the right to
organize is codified into law, and any retaliatory action by management
related thereto is strictly prohibited."

Source: [https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/30/tech/amazon-worker-fired-
stat...](https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/30/tech/amazon-worker-fired-staten-
island-warehouse/index.html)

\---

Here is another article discussing the actual conditions of Mr. Smalls
Facility:

\---

Despite Amazon’s efforts, Amazon employees at multiple facilities who spoke to
CNBC argue that the measures aren’t enough to keep them safe. They say uneven
safety precautions at facilities across the country have sown feelings of
distrust between workers and their managers. Workers say they’ve become
worried that managers aren’t being honest about whether employees are sick
with the virus, so that they can keep the facilities open.

At some facilities, workers say essential supplies like hand sanitizer and
disinfectant wipes are rationed or there’s none available, putting them at
risk of catching the virus. Warehouse workers say they’re forced to choose
between going to work and risking their health or staying home and not being
able to pay their bills.

Source: [https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/30/amazon-fires-staten-
island-c...](https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/30/amazon-fires-staten-island-
coronavirus-strike-leader-chris-smalls.html)

\---

Amazon is in the wrong here. They retaliated against Mr. Smalls. This was a
labor movement action, and they illegally fired Mr. Smalls for organizing at
this facility.

These workers aren't asking for more money. They are asking for safe and
sanitary working conditions. Are they not entitled to a healthy working
environment?

Edit: Formatting issues. This was a copy-paste from a comment I made on a
/r/business thread on reddit. Formatting on HN is a bit different. :)

~~~
darksaints
How does at-will employment work with union busting? I remember working at
Amazon they were very adamant about everything being at-will. Furthermore, in
their management training, they didn't even tiptoe around their hatred of
unions. They basically have a formal system developed to rat out any union
organizers. The only reason I can infer for the existence of such a system is
so that they can bust unions. They seem willing to take the legal risks that
come with retaliation.

~~~
SpicyLemonZest
“Union busting” is a pretty vague term. There’s no legal issue with a company
hating unions or trying to prevent a union from forming, as long as they don’t
prevent employees from talking or retaliate against them for it.

~~~
kitanata
That may be true, but in this instance there is clear evidence that Mr. Smalls
was retaliated against for his labor organizing actions.

~~~
missedthecue
"Mr. Smalls was retaliated against for his labor organizing actions"

This is actually quite unclear

------
songshuu
Is there a company out there that does full time employment, with benefits,
and pays their taxes (no dutch sandwhich/offshoring) in the same space as
Amazon? That is, an online megastore, not worrying about AWS/cloud.

I think there's more than a few of us who are ready to vote with their
dollars.

~~~
Apocryphon
Costco delivers, and has a better corporate reputation than Amazon and
Walmart.

~~~
catacombs
But how much taxes does it pay? I very skeptical of any company that claims to
pay its fair share.

~~~
missedthecue
Why is it a bad thing if a company has loss carryforwards and R&D credits?

------
elgfare
I've been personally boycotting Amazon for years, and very happy with that
decision. There are so many stories like this which are more or less
egregious.

------
2OEH8eoCRo0
This is the part where everyone stops buying from Amazon as a show of
solidarity right?

~~~
y-c-o-m-b
Now would be a great time to do this given the delays of the once-convenient
fast shipping times. That said, what are the equal alternatives?

I think for most consumers, some things are absolutely required in order to
switch away from Amazon: fast shipping, an inventory of hard-to-find items
(e.g. car part or furnace element typically found on Amazon), a good
refunds/returns system, and a massive crackdown on counterfeit products.

That last one is really important to me. Vendors are now filling legit
containers of brand name items with fake product, then resealing them as new.
This is becoming increasingly common now. I've noticed it with food (Pumpkin
seeds, noticed a poor re-seal job), vitamins (a hole in the top seal beneath
the cap despite being plastic wrapped), and Clorox bromine tablets for a spa
(tablets didn't match store bought version). These products have all been
obviously tampered with.

~~~
icelancer
There's a fairly decent alternative to Amazon for most of the things you
listed.

It's Wal-Mart and walmart.com. Oh. Not much better from a workers' rights
standpoint than Amazon, I guess...

------
booleandilemma
Amazon being Amazon.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQeGBHxIyHw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQeGBHxIyHw)

------
jbverschoor
If amazon is so shitty, and aws is so expensive compared to others... why on
earth do people still pour all their cash in it

~~~
scruple
Where I work, we're basically donating money to the Bezos charity known as AWS
at this point. We have so much waste in our multiple AWS accounts. We have
people who double things up because they can't/don't/won't communicate
(effectively). It's truly an unmanaged disaster. Bring it up to management,
they don't seem to care. Even back on the napkin estimates are showing us
wasting > 100k a year on unnecessary or outright unused AWS services. They
still don't care. And I know we're not alone and that there are other places
(even in my immediate geographical area) that have waste well in excess of
what we're pissing away.

~~~
abtinf
Your company is operating inefficiently in some regard. You’ve done the leg
work and determined this inefficiency costs about ~$100k annually. You take
this to your leadership with a proposal: we can save this money through better
communication among teams, a review of existing system for “unnecessary” or
unused services, and “management”.

From an engineering perspective, this makes perfect sense!

But management reacts negatively, maybe even becoming skeptical of your value
to the org. Why?

1\. The savings you propose are too small to make a significant difference to
profitability. $100k is equivalent to between .3 to 1 FTE engineers depending
on geography.

2\. Someone has to run this project, they will cost money. Engineers will have
to be involved, they will cost money. Every project team is going to have to
evaluate their usage and provide justification documents, so now the costs are
cascading through the org.

3\. Remember that the cost of a decision is the sum of the the cost of the
thing done plus the cost of the things forgone. People working on this are not
working on things customers will pay for—that is, things that get multiplied
by many customers now and into the future and differentiates from the
competition. This project has its own costs. The savings must be very, very
high to compensate for both.

4\. It’s hard to imagine how the savings can be sustained without significant
new bureaucracy. Every resource allocation is going to have to go through an
architecture, implementation, harmonization, and business necessity
justification review. That is a lot of new gate keepers.

5\. You indicated that teams already “can’t/won’t/don’t communicate.” This
means the teams are going to have significant political battles over who
owns/runs which resources. Ownership of a the architecture is a tool to
bludgeon other departments into compliance—which will make inter-team
conflicts worse because they can’t just agree to disagree. Suddenly, one team
winning an argument means winning forever.

6\. Solving the previous point with better communication is not viable—it
would mean solving fundamental problems in organizational management and
psychology.

So, what can you do? The fundamental issue here is that the scale of the
problem does not match the scale of the organization. Cost saving projects
that succeed—like google early on deciding to develop their own servers and
racks instead of buying off the shelf—provide a sustaining competitive
advantage. Google saves so much money from its infrastructure investments that
it lets them build products that would be wildly expensive for others to
replicate.

In business language this is referred to as cost leadership. Ferrari has a
much lower need for cost leadership than Toyota. Ferrari still needs to
contain costs to be profitable, but it primarily competes on differentiated
products in a focused market. They might be interested in saving money on
aerodynamic simulations so they could do even more of them. But Toyota would
quickly go bankrupt if they didn’t make cost leadership part of everything
they do—just a few years a failing to improve efficiency would lead to their
cars costing many thousands of dollars more than competitors in a market
sensitive to price.

Which kind of company do you work for: one that serves the broad market (AWS)
or something more niche (IBM Mainframes)? One that competes on price
(commercial airlines) or one that competes on differentiated features (private
jets)? Craft your project proposals to the business and they may have a much
higher probability to getting heard.

~~~
askafriend
Fantastic reply.

It's the type of reply I want to write every time I see misguided comments
from people who don't have the full picture of the business and don't even
know that they don't have the full picture.

~~~
scruple
My comment started with:

> Where I work, we're basically donating money to the Bezos charity known as
> AWS at this point.

And ended with:

> And I know we're not alone and that there are other places (even in my
> immediate geographical area) that have waste well in excess of what we're
> pissing away.

That was my point. I perfectly (okay, maybe not perfectly, but well enough to
understand that it's not worth my time to pursue) understand why and how these
things happen, it isn't my first rodeo. And, honestly, I think I'd probably
applaud the guy for figuring out how to get _damn near every one in SV_ to
open up their fat fucking VC wallets to the man if it weren't for his business
practices, like what we see in TFA.

~~~
abtinf
If this is an issue that really bugs you, perhaps consider working for a
company that has similar values to you.

Working for tech in the valley is going to be extremely biased on focused
differentiation, so cost containment has a lower priority.

On the other hand, the people I know in logistics and manufacturing are
extremely concerned about cost containment. For them, charging more for the
product/service is orders of magnitude more difficult than cutting
costs—indeed, improving efficiency is often the primary method of growing the
company (through lower prices or increased output). Such companies, even ones
making hundreds of millions in revenue, would be very interested in proposals
that save $100k/year.

------
unexaminedlife
IANAL, but would be interested to know if it would've BENEFITED their case if
they met with a lawyer BEFORE putting their plans into action. It seems this
would've been a pretty legitimate way of confirming their intention, and
would've put Amazon in a much more compromising position after the fact.

------
jdkee
After this is all over, Amazon needs to be subjected to the full range of
antitrust laws and regulations. And broken up.

------
alephnan
Would it be illegal for Amazon’s competitors to extend job offers to those who
are at risk of being fired for going on strike? (If the fear is being fired as
retaliation)

~~~
therealcamino
The aim of the law is to prevent employers from blocking unionization. Your
hypothetical might prevent harm to specific individuals who were fired, but it
wouldn't achieve the overall goal of protecting the right to organize. Instead
it would rid the employer of the organizers, which is what the employer wants.

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

------
eecc
SARS-cov-2 survives days on cardboard.

If you can’t give two f _cks for the workers, do it for tour own consumers’
ass.

Amazon must enforce sanitary and safe working conditions during the COVID19
epidemic lest it becomes itself a source of contagion. More so now that home
delivery is so important in the “stay home” strategy.

For f_cks sake people, how big a stick do you need before you notice?!

~~~
soperj
> SARS-cov-2 survives days on cardboard.

It doesn't.

~~~
y-c-o-m-b
From [https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/new-
coronaviru...](https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/new-coronavirus-
stable-hours-surfaces)

> The scientists found that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2
> (SARS-CoV-2) was detectable in aerosols for up to three hours, up to four
> hours on copper, up to 24 hours on cardboard and up to two to three days on
> plastic and stainless steel.

24 hours is within the time-frame of same-day deliveries at the least. I think
OP's point still stands; it's a disease vector.

~~~
soperj
24 hours isn't days.

------
sabujp
whatever you believe, all they want is for them to shutdown and clean, how
hard is that?

------
earthshot
The worker was exposed to covid-19, was told to quarantine, and came back on
site anyway.

This strikes me as an egregious safety violation and a truly excellent reason
to fire the worker.

~~~
lordleft
I think the point is that more than just this worker was exposed to
COVID-19...shouldn't the entire warehouse be shuttered?

~~~
delfinom
It's not anthrax. You are unlikely to get it from just being the in same space
a day after the fact.

~~~
klyrs
Unless you, say, use the same push cart, flush the same toilet, etc

------
freepor
They’ll settle out of court with this guy in 2 years for $10 million but it’s
worth it to them to silence him at the present moment.

------
alephnan
> Like all businesses grappling with the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, we are
> working hard to keep employees safe while serving communities and the most
> vulnerable

Because people who can afford Amazon prime and prices are the most vulnerable

~~~
Rebelgecko
I mean, so far yes. I think people with disposable income and those who travel
a lot have been early adopters when it comes to getting the virus.
Politicians, professional athletes, and rich people seem disproportionately
likely to be infected, and I wouldn't be surprised if that imbalance still
existed once you accounted for the differences in test availability. ofc
that's my North America-centric perception which may change in the coming
months

------
ertemplin
> Despite that instruction to stay home with pay, he came on site today, March
> 30, further putting the teams at risk

The employee was exposed to another employee who tested positive for covid-19.
They asked him to stay home with pay for 14 days and he came back to the
building to protest, putting other employees at risk.

~~~
Mizza
Whenever there is anti-Amazon or pro-Union discussion, the first comment on HN
will always be siding with management. Why is that?

This obviously an illegal retaliatory firing. Amazon is running domestic
sweatshops where they don't even provide basic PPE during a global pandemic,
and he was the leader trying to get that gear.

Seriously - what goes through the head of somebody who posts a comment siding
with management in a situation like this? I literally can't understand why
you'd think to post something like this, unless you're an Amazon executive or
shareholder and only care about short term face/profit. Otherwise - why the
reactionary take?

I just find this level of obedience to authority baffling. It's endemic in the
United States, which otherwise prides itself on it's "maverick" status -
except when it comes to shocking levels of obedience and servitude to the
police and to market forces.

EDIT: I looked up this user and he is an Amazon employee, which explains this
bizarre take. Given Amazon's policy of paying employees to say nice things
about the company online, even when they work in unrelated departments, I
think we should seriously consider warning/banning users who engage in
astroturfing for their employers on HackerNews.

~~~
jlmorton
> Amazon is running domestic sweatshops where they don't even provide basic
> PPE during a global pandemic

It doesn't help your argument to frame it in hyperbolic terms. Amazon pays a
minimum wage of $15/hour, every warehouse is air conditioned, they now offer
paid time off to every worker who works >20 hours a week, they have
substantial career advancement training and education benefits, they have
health benefits and matching 401k program, 20 weeks paid parental leave.

I mean, come on. There might be some legitimate problems, but when you call it
a sweatshop, you've already lost the argument.

~~~
me_me_me
and they have employees pissing into bottles because toilet breaks are
limited/timed/monitored.

I mean, come on. What would take for you to piss into bottle at your work
instead of going to toilet.

~~~
gamblor956
Amazon pays very well for an entry-level job. Yes, work conditions suck
compared to white-collar work. Many blue-collar jobs do, especially now that
the 6-figure blue collar factory jobs have all but disappeared.

But that's the price you pay for a job that has no requirements beyond being
able to use your hands.

~~~
nabnob
Who decides whether blue collar workers deserve bathroom breaks? Why do you
treat the free market as the sole authority on what working conditions people
"deserve"?

You're arguing that shaving off a couple minutes a day is worth the loss of
human dignity that these workers experience.

~~~
me_me_me
That's the problem with economies at scale, a bathroom break for small store
owner is not an issue. When you have 1000's of stores its a massive saving
area, where its much easier to justify pissing bottles. Any small trivial
thing at scale can cost or save huge amounts money.

And when we talk huge sums of money, morality often is tossed out of the
window first.

~~~
jlmorton
You're suggesting that for a small business, because the value of five minutes
of a single employee's time is trifling, the small business does not care to
regulate bathroom breaks.

I don't really see it that way. In my view, small businesses abuse their
employees just dramatically more than large businesses.

For a small business, a single employee may be the only person working the
till. The employee simply won't be allowed to go to the bathroom at all except
during designated times.

