
I Delivered Packages for Amazon and It Was a Nightmare - yarapavan
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/06/amazon-flex-workers/563444/
======
crazygringo
Comments here so far seem oddly dismissive of the article ("what's the point",
"entitled millenial", "jealous", "click-bait").

But they're missing the larger critical points which are very newsworthy:

\- The author almost injured themselves with an overly heavy box because
Amazon didn't provide them with a dolly, warn them they needed one, and if
they did injure themselves the medical bills are their own

\- Amazon is asking them to deliver packages where parking without getting a
ticket is a logistical impossibility and risk making negative $ for the day
due to tickets

\- These kinds of safety and minimum wage regulations which have been hard-won
over the past decades are being completely avoided by Amazon by (possibly
wrongly/illegally) classifying them as independent contractors, which seems to
be a scandal that laws/regulations ought to fix, but compulsory arbitration
may be preventing class-action lawsuits which would otherwise correct the
situation

~~~
Sharlin
Many HNers may lack self-awareness of their own privileged situation, working
in a field where employees are often showered with benefits unthinkable in
most other professions.

~~~
jsiepkes
I've always been puzzled by this; Nobody seems to care about Joe average. Even
worse is that saying that you are "disrupting" Joe average's world / life is
regarded as a good thing. All these ideas to disrupt all seem to have in
common that they are a race to the bottom for average Joe.

While some markets need to be torn open it's always done with a total
disregard for the average Joe's who are caught in the crossfire and are paying
the price for it.

~~~
golergka
If someone can disrupt a market that Joe's working in and provide the same (or
better) service cheaper, why on Earth does he have an obligation to think
about said Joe? That just sounds like a Copenhagen principle of moral
entanglement to me.

~~~
angleofrepose
Because he's a person. Because she has problems. Because he has a family.
Because that's my friend and uncle and neighbor. What on Earth do you mean
"why do we have to care about them?" Because they're real.

I get where you're coming from about the exasperatingly impossible web of
moral obligations, but you can't give up.

~~~
golergka
> Because he's a person. Because she has problems. Because he has a family.

That's just appeal to empathy - any human has it, until he's a sociopath, but
like any other basic instinct, it's human nature to reign over it and not let
it run your life.

> Because he has a family. Because that's my friend and uncle and neighbor.

Most likely he's not - there are very few people who I (or you) would actually
call family and care about in the way you care about family. This Joe is most
likely just an anonymous person that you don't know or care about.

> I get where you're coming from about the exasperatingly impossible web of
> moral obligations, but you can't give up.

I can't give up something that I didn't put on myself first.

------
bsg75
I doubt this is a new observation, but what strikes me is that the US
employment system is based on benefits via employment (healthcare,
retirement).

The current "gig economy" trend removes these benefits from employment, and
with a government currently opposed to public benefits, the US could be headed
towards a problem within a single generation.

This race to the bottom (disruption) seems counter productive for anything but
short term investment.

~~~
ghaff
In the case of health insurance, it mostly came about because of wage controls
during WW II. Companies couldn't offer more money in a tight labor market but
they were allowed to offer fringe benefits like insurance.

401(k)'s history is almost wacky. It was an obscure provision in 1978 tax law
and a benefits consultant figured out a way to turn it into something that
companies could easily offer to employees as a tax-advantaged benefit.

Of course, once a benefit becomes the norm, it's almost impossible for
individual firms to not offer it.

~~~
smelendez
401 (k) history is something I've wondered about. Why is it provided by the
employer, as opposed to you choosing your own IRS-approved provider and
telling your employer to send a portion of your check there?

~~~
ghaff
I am by no means an expert but my understanding is that it's mostly a function
of its somewhat accidental history. Which also makes things like rolling over
401(k)s from previous employers way more convoluted than it should be.

You do additionally have a personal option, IRAs, that you can establish at
the broker of your choice that give you a lot more flexibility. You can
probably setup payroll auto-deduction in many cases.

~~~
ams6110
In my experience, it's not complicated at all to roll a 401k from a previous
employer into a personal IRA at provider such as Vanguard, Schwab, etc.

~~~
ghaff
I've done it and know others who have. It's "complicated" in the sense that it
wasn't just click some things online. That may be a good thing from a security
perspective but it's still a PITA.

------
amarkov
I'm sure it's a nightmare for a professional journalist. And I don't mean that
as an insult - it'd be a nightmare for me too.

But you know what's _more_ of a nightmare? Driving around to every retail
outlet in a 30 mile radius, trying to convince them that you can be the most
submissive and obedient out of the 200 applicants. It's hard to begrudge the
gig economy for providing an alternative to that.

~~~
AJ007
I've been running my own tech company for over a decade now, and prior to that
my job was everything from cleaning toilets to changing lightbulbs. On paper
it sounds terrible, but I was very happy.

The work environment matters a lot. The other people you work with matter. How
you are managed matters. I think if gig software designers thought a lot about
this, they would see a lot of improvement in worker retention and
satisfaction.

~~~
Drdrdrq
This, and very well written! A lot of the complaints from the article are
really all easily solvable issues. I mean, really? I need to click an app for
an hour to get the block? Just run a lottery. And what do you mean I have to
catch people around? Change the rules so that I need to make best effort (and
document it), and that's it. And give customers your own numbers so you can
forward calls just during the working hours (though that makes it look even
more like the workers are your employees). I won't even comment on trouble
with scanning codes.

Note that while this would make job a lot more enjoyable for workers, I still
think everyone should enjoy the same basic benefits, no matter what kind of
employment relationship they are in. But that could also be solved in other
ways (basic income for example).

------
lisper
Our economy, indeed much of our societal ethos in general, is rooted in the
assumption that labor is a scarce commodity. This was true throughout most of
human history, but it started becoming less true with the advent of the
industrial revolution, and AI and automation will soon drive the last nail in
the labor-scarcity coffin.

When labor is scarce, there are two consequences of that scarcity that make
our current societal structure work: first, anyone capable of working
possesses an inalienable resource (their own labor) that they can exchange for
other goods and services in order to survive, and second, basing your economy
on this kind of exchange (as opposed to, for example, slave labor) encourages
people to work and be productive.

But when labor is no longer scarce, all of this changes in radical ways.
Humans in general no longer have access to an inalienable source of wealth,
and wealth becomes rooted exclusively in _ownership_ rather than _production_.
We essentially revert back to a slave-like economy, with machines playing the
role of chattel slaves. But for non-owners, for people without capital, there
is no longer any recourse. Sooner or later, something is going to have to
give.

There are only a very few things that humans can still do with more economic
effectiveness than machines: drive vehicles, pick fruit, clean houses, and
fold shirts. Really, that's about it. And technology is busily chipping away
at the first one. Sooner or later, we are going to have to make a fundamental
change in how our society is structured, or things will get very unpleasant
for a lot of folks.

~~~
zorked
Was labour ever scarce? Was work ever an inalienable form of wealth?

Why did half the world go through communist revolutions, is that because
workers were too wealthy?

~~~
MalikOcano
_Was labour ever scarce?_

Yes after 1/3 to 1/2 of Europe died from the bubonic plague. Workers were
scarce so they were able to demand better pay and working conditions. Which is
why those who run our economy would prefer to keep labor plentiful.

------
iamleppert
A lot of jobs suck. I worked at a KFC for 3 years and a Gameworks, two full
time jobs, for 3 years before I began my tech career. I got paid $6.50/hr at
KFC and $9.00/hr at Gameworks. No health insurance, benefits, I had to use my
own car often to do stuff for them both. It was hell and I hated it. It’s sad
but these jobs always exist and probably will for at least the near future.

That said, Amazon should be doing a better job to educate people on how to be
successful in these jobs and should adapt the jobs depending on city. It makes
no sense to have people driving around in their own cars in SF delivering
packages. They could go a long way by hiring bike couriers and doing a better
job at distribution. It sure doesn’t sound like last mile delivery when they
are forcing people to drive down to south SF to get the stuff.

If I was an engineer at Amazon working on this flex program I’d be
embarrassed. If you filter out the entitled and emotional undertone of the
author there are many matter of fact things that are just poorly designed and
executed on the designers of this system. Sitting at home and refreshing an
app? Really? That hour you keep people occupied with a pointless task because
of your poor design is an hour you’ve burned of their time that could have
been spent doing something productive for either themselves or Amazon.

Not doing address validation, poor distribution logistics, poor use of labor.
I guess there is no external pressure to fix anything until they have burned
through the labor pool in SF and no one wants to work with the dysfunction?
Wonder when that will be...

~~~
sumoboy
Kind of a wild west for DIY local delivery jobs. I've talked to the UPS guy
several times about these new logistics businesses that have popped up as
delivery partners for Amazon and he's said it's a sh%tshow sending drivers off
to delivery all over the city, total chaos.

Density populated areas, airports, sporting events, etc all have had to make
changes to deal with Uber and Lyft traffic so the city handing out parking
tickets doesn't solve much. Seems like heavily populated city addresses &
building owners need to solve the last 10 yards because it's not going to slow
down.

------
gniv
> (None of the 19 videos I had to watch to be a Flex driver recommended
> bringing a delivery cart or a dolly.)

I wonder why that is. Do they think it's so obvious that it's not worth
mentioning, or they really don't care?

~~~
noobermin
Given the myriad articles I've read about working conditions in Amazon across
the organization, it's most likely the latter.

------
jarym
Some corporations derive a huge benefit from the gig economy - either as a
central part of their business (Uber drivers) or enticing more customers from
competitors (Amazon with great a delivery service).

The losses on the gig worker (benefits, holiday entitlement, etc.) need to be
borne by someone - and it doesn't make sense, in my view, to make either the
gig work or the government (the wider public) pay for it.

I would suggest that all companies using gig workers (anyone doing work for a
corporation without a proper employment contract) need to pay in to a
mandatory fund to cover the lost benefits. To me its obvious that the cost
should be borne by whoever is extracting the greatest benefit.

------
hamandcheese
> Amazon also does not break down how much he receives in tips and how much he
> receives in pay from the company—for all he knows, people are tipping him
> $20 and Amazon is paying him less than minimum wage.

Wow. Do other gig economy jobs do this? Uber and Lyft? I may just start
carrying cash to leave tips now.

~~~
ummonk
I believe Lyft does not take any cut from the tip.

------
gnicholas
I recently saw a 6-year old boy delivering a package for Amazon. He got out of
a regular van, dropped off the package, and bounded back to the car. I guess
he was probably the child of one of these Flex contractors.

This happened just off Sand Hill Rd., as it happens.

------
vinni2
Reminds me of this episode from Vice news [0]. They don’t get paid for car
maintenance, gas or any other unforeseen expenses while delivering packages.

[0] [https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/kzyw4y/amazon-is-
imitati...](https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/kzyw4y/amazon-is-imitating-
uber-to-drive-down-the-cost-of-delivering-goods)

------
pfortuny
“Flex is necessary.”

I stopped there.

------
whoisjuan
So what? What's the point of these articles? You could write the same about
anything."I cleaned houses for a week and it was a nightmare", "I worked as a
store clerk for a week and it was a nightmare"...

This is cheap click-bait journalism trying to get on the wave of writing
something about Amazon labor conditions.

Modern American journalism is a joke. Many things in this country are wrong
and people can and should rightfully complain/voice their concerns about those
things, but this type of journalism is just the equivalent of setting a house
on fire just to have the exclusive that you were the one who covered it first.
How can we trust any news outlet right or left, if their motivation is only
just clicks and impressions?

~~~
yborg
The difference is that Amazon is crushing local store retail everywhere it
does business, which is everywhere, and spends large amounts of effort on
brand management to softpedal the fact that this domination is largely thanks
to its ability to squeeze more from its labor force. We'll leave aside how
this crushing of local retail was also aided by its ability to avoid local
taxes for many years while it was growing. All of this makes it very fair game
for criticism, especially when Amazon touts the "great earnings" of being a
freelance driver for them.

If there was some giant corporation that was dominating house cleaning
nationally and touting the great pay of cleaning toilets for them as a
freelancer, that would certainly warrant some inspection, too.

~~~
MalikOcano
_Amazon is crushing local store retail everywhere it does business_

Around here the local retail businesses Amazon is crushing are owned by large
corporations, who previously put the small, independent retailers out of
business decades ago.

The same way Netflix put Blockbuster out of business, who put the small,
independent video renters out of business long before.

