
Amazon Hires Homeless Workers, and Everyone Ends Up Disappointed - deegles
http://kuow.org/post/amazon-hires-homeless-workers-and-everyone-ends-disappointed
======
danielrhodes
It's almost as if Amazon is being criticised for offering the jobs in the
first place, and instead they are being saddled with the entire burden of the
issues homeless people face. I think that is unfair. What Amazon agreed to do
is essentially look the other way on issues which employers usually see as
reasons to not hire. It is very clearly seasonal work and there are many
benefits to doing that work which might lead to more reliable jobs in the
future.

~~~
cfcef
Ethical entanglement: if you try to make a problem slightly better, then by
not fixing it entirely you are now to blame. Happens all the time:
[http://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-
ethi...](http://blog.jaibot.com/the-copenhagen-interpretation-of-ethics/)

~~~
SilasX
Yep, you beat me to it. It's like a variant on the old joke[1]:

"You must be a profiteer."

'Sure, I guess I count as one. How'd you know?'

"Well, you learned about the immense, tragic problem of homelessness, and
apparently your first thought was, wow, awesome, a cheap labor force I can use
to cut costs!"

'Hm, okay, fair enough. You must be a philosopher then.'

"Yes! You're right! How'd you know?"

'Well, because homelessness has been around for ages, and appears to be
intractable, and you've been unable to make any real progress on it, and yet
when I offer homeless people an alternative to their current state, and some
of them take it, somehow, the whole problem is all my fault."

[1]
[https://www2.bc.edu/~radinr/Management_Humor/jokes.htm](https://www2.bc.edu/~radinr/Management_Humor/jokes.htm)

~~~
crdoconnor
>Well, because homelessness has been around for ages, and appears to be
intractable

It's not at all intractable. Giving jobs to the jobless and homes to the
homeless is exactly as straightforward as it looks.

The homeless and jobless serve a function, though - to keep wages and
agitation down for the precariously employed and the precariously housed.
They're like this mainly for the benefit of corporations like Amazon which
farm cheap labor.

Effectively the homeless serve as a form of 'public good' for the owners of
capital.

That's why proposals to house or give homeless jobs with government money are
met with sheer disgust by the same media that happily endorses spending
billions of dollars dropping bombs on brown children.

~~~
BetaCygni
It is not straightforward at all. Most homeless people suffer from a mental
illness. You'd have to treat that first. Some of them might not want to be
treated though...

The notion that the owners of capital would want to have homeless people is
absurd. The "capitalists" would like everyone to be working, as higher
production means more profits for them. The state may need to step in with a
minimum wage (or basic income), but otherwise the system should work fine.

~~~
crdoconnor
>It is not straightforward at all. Most homeless people suffer from a mental
illness.

Unsurprisingly unemployment and homelessness and being told that it's all your
fault causes mental illness, especially when combined with attempts to self
medicate with drugs or alcohol.

>The notion that the owners of capital would want to have homeless people is
absurd. The "capitalists" would like everyone to be working, as higher
production means more profits for them.

More unemployed + homeless

=> More afraid workers

=> Workers who are willing to take a lower wage

=> Higher profits

The notion that higher production automatically leads to higher profits is
pretty comical.

~~~
Decade
>>It is not straightforward at all. Most homeless people suffer from a mental
illness.

>Unsurprisingly unemployment and homelessness and being told that it's all
your fault causes mental illness, especially when combined with attempts to
self medicate with drugs or alcohol.

Achievement unlocked: Trivialized mental illness.

Being homeless is certainly stressful on the psyche, but not every crazy
homeless person started as a sane homeless person. Some people just cannot
function as independent adults. One person I know managed to score Section 8
housing, and she trashed the apartment and threatened the landlord and ended
up on the street. Until her condition deteriorated enough for the police to
call a 5150 on her.

But she doesn't consider herself crazy. Just stressed out. Modern liberation
theory means the institutions consider her to be an adult, so if she says she
doesn't want to stay in an asylum, then there's no way for us non-super-rich
people to stop her from leaving psychiatric care and ruining her life.

There is no firm boundary between crazy and sane, and even being delusional
doesn't prevent one from being a productive member of society. We just don't
have enough appropriate services for all the crazy people in this country.

[http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NGY6DqB1HX8](http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NGY6DqB1HX8)

~~~
crdoconnor
>Being homeless is certainly stressful on the psyche, but not every crazy
homeless person started as a sane homeless person.

Most of them started out not being able to hold down a job, however.

------
Someone1234
Wow that was a really depressing read. I did learn several new problems that
homeless people can face getting back into the working world that I wasn't
aware of (e.g. night shift work isn't compatible with homeless shelters).

~~~
thescriptkiddie
My takeaway from this is that homeless shelters don't do enough to support
employment of the homeless, and that a minimum wage job is not sufficient to
get you off the street. Conversations I've had with homeless people seem to
corroborate this.

~~~
samstave
I did the math previously on the numbers that SF put out on the homless
support they pay out per homeless person; $25k per year / homeless...

yet the services are abysmal!

One of the things I've long thought would be three areas to address
homelessness;

1\. create "hygiene trucks" \- they are semi trailers that are mobile that
would provide showers, bathrooms, 'scrubs' style basic clothing.

2\. container based micro housing, divide the containers into ~3 rooms.

3\. "standard pantry" \-- give them a basic standard pantry which has the
ingredients or basic meals (a step up from MREs)

4\. basic min-wage jobs with initiatives like this with Amazon where the co
gets a tax break - but must provide basic skills like cleaning, organizing
etc.

Then -- FOCUS ON MENTAL HEALTH

Mental health degenerates REALLY fast for those that dont have the above
basics.

NO PETS.

~~~
dpark
> _1\. create "hygiene trucks" \- they are semi trailers that are mobile that
> would provide showers, bathrooms, 'scrubs' style basic clothing._

How is this better than a permanent facility? It's got to be way more
expensive to build this into a truck.

> _2\. container based micro housing, divide the containers into ~3 rooms._

Containers are not an affordable way to build housing. Shipping containers
converted into housing is a fetish for rich people with architects.

> _FOCUS ON MENTAL HEALTH_

Yep. Mental health problems are highly correlated with homelessness.
Everything from depression to schizophrenia to substance abuse. Often multiple
issues combined.

> _NO PETS._

This eliminates a huge number of homeless. Many homeless desperately cling to
their pets because they have no one else.

~~~
placeybordeaux
You might get beyond not in my backyard with a truck.

~~~
dpark
Maybe, but if you can build container housing in someone's backyard, I'm
pretty sure you can get a washroom in there, too.

~~~
barsonme
I think the previous poster was referring to NIMBYs[1] (people who oppose
something because of its proximity to them, even if it's a necessity).

A fair amount of people wouldn't want a homeless shelter or washroom next to
their house, but a mobile truck could have the same benefit while placating
the NIMBYs.

[1]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NIMBY](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NIMBY)

~~~
dpark
I understand that. Item 2 on the list was container-based micro housing units,
though, which are going to have to be built/installed somewhere. If you can
get the permits and land to install micro housing units, you can most
certainly get permits to install shower and was facilities. In fact you are
required to do so. You cannot housing housing without plumbing.

------
sabmalik
I am not sure what this article achieves. I think it only discourages
companies from hiring homeless people.

How is the risk of going into these kinds of jobs any different for a non-
homeless person? Possibly even greater, given they are paying rent/mortgage,
car lease whatever.

Would it be better if these kinds of job completely abolished? Anyone who puts
their hand up for these jobs, knows or should know what they are getting into.

Having said that, efforts should be made to work out the issues rather than
just bash anyone who is trying to lend a hand (even for selfish reasons). For
instance the shelters could adjust their policies and accommodate the people
who work during the night (and have proof of it).

~~~
jon-wood
> Anyone who puts their hand up for these jobs, knows or should know what they
> are getting into.

In many cases they know they're getting into the only job available to them,
and that their kids need to eat.

We shouldn't be creating a world where people are expected to do strenous
physical labour under stressful conditions for barely enough money to live.
Amazon is taking billions a year, it doesn't seem unreasonable that the people
who make that possible should see some of that.

~~~
sabmalik
I appreciate the sentiment but what exactly are you proposing?

~~~
jon-wood
Ideally, companies voluntarily paying at least enough that someone working
there can expect enough to live a decent life. Short of that, a higher minimum
wage.

------
tn13
Everyone ends up disappointing is a bad characterization. I am surprised that
a company as big as Amazon even bothers to hire homeless people. If the people
prefer night shelter over night work they could perhaps stay in the shelter.

I think we must applaud Amazon for this brave move in first place and homeless
people should be thankful to Amazon. Clearly these people have not seen 15
Indian students staying in 2 Bedroom apartment earning below minimum wage for
part time work.

~~~
dpark
> _If the people prefer night shelter over night work they could perhaps stay
> in the shelter._

Perhaps they shouldn't have to choose between shelter and employment.

> _I think we must applaud Amazon for this brave move_

We can applaud Amazon for trying while also acknowledging problems with the
attempt.

> _Clearly these people have not seen 15 Indian students staying in 2 Bedroom
> apartment earning below minimum wage for part time work._

Maybe not. Instead they've seen 50 hungry people crowd into a shelter trying
to get a night's sleep while earning no wage at all. They've also seen 50 more
get turned away because the shelter is at capacity. And they've probably been
in the second 50 many times themselves.

This is ridiculous. Do you suppose students working part time and living in
cramped quarters actually have it worse than people who are literally
unemployed and homeless?

~~~
tn13
No one else has an obligation to fix the world for others. People can only
pick between choices they have.

10 people working at night can pool in money and rent a space just to sleep
during day time. I have done that in past and it worked well. There are
several ways to solve these problems without complaining.

------
inaudible
Homelessness shelters will generally be up against some pretty tight
constraints. Their service is non-profit, their staffing is either voluntary
or tight and their organization structure will be pushed by fluctuating
demand.

The constraints on a company participating in a program are quite
disproportionate, they're looking to fill a seasonal gap and while looking
towards a social problem to fill this gap is honourable (and mutually
beneficial), they also need to be aware of the duress that mutually beneficial
labour can create.

This article only attempts to highlight the constraints. Amazon should have
better social policy to be deal with the vulnerabilities of the assets they
hire in this situation. I'm sure it's a learning experience for the YWCA, but
the onus is still on Amazon to be able to better negotiate stable living
conditions for the people it employed through such a program. These are people
who have the potential to get out of bad situation but are still vulnerable
(financially / socially / mentally), and this vulnerability should be
realistically accounted for as the real liability that it is to the company
employing.

No company needs to embark on such a program, they could fill labour shortages
through traditional means, but when they do, it should be with some mutual
agreement to work with the organisation and employees to ensure a quality
outcome. Anything less is socially negligent.

It's heartening that Amazon wanted to participate, but I hope they can take on
the criticism and help build a better program.

------
placeybordeaux
The title implies that Amazon was disappointed, that doesn't seem to be the
case.

------
pvaldes
Hum, maybe the problem here is not in Amazon, maybe is with the shelters
culture.

What if some shelters around just reverse its schedule, and start closing by
night and opening by day for this people?.

Amazon will have what they want

Homeless will have a job and a safe place to stay when is colder out and most
conflicts between homeless and drunked people arose. I suppose that Amazon
pays for heating its buildings.

Shelters could save some precious money in electricity and heating and maybe
an easier life for shelter's volunteers.

It seems that all parts will benefit.

------
betaby
Slightly off topic, but why in US diplomas are not universal? Why nurse from
Dallas suddenly is not nurse is Seattle? What is 'good' about that? Personally
I have hard time imagine any sane reasoning for that. Are one locked to the
state where one did studies? How cross-state studying work then?

~~~
pyre
It's not diplomas it's certifications. It (e.g.) a lawyer moves between states
he or she may need to take _that_ new state's bar exam.

~~~
betaby
Ok. While it's different, the difference is subtle. As you said for lawyers
there is an exam each time one changing state? Same for nurses? Engineers? I
can't see good part of that.

~~~
pyre
The difference is that there is no nationwide licensing body, so the license
issued by the "nursing licensing body" in Texas needs to be transferred to the
"nursing licensing body" in Washington state. And they need to accept it and
turn it into a Washington state nursing certification.

Because these are separate bodies there may be different rules, regulations,
standards regarding what it takes to be a nurse.

~~~
Ntrails
Yet a doctor can travel between _countries_ who agree to have "equivalence"
between qualifications.

Law obviously makes sense when so much is state specific, I'd be less
convinced by nursing.

------
JohnDoe365
What I get: There is a base line of unattractivety which Amazon crossed.
Working under the conditions Amazon provided in that specific program
effectively reduced overall utility. Which in turn means that being homeless
without that job is better that having a job like that.

That should tell something.

~~~
Shivetya
No, what I got was that the terms of the job were not communicated correctly,
possibly not presented at all. It depends on who at the YMCA was doing the
recruiting. Was it an Amazon rep or someone at the YMCA just selling a dream?

Warehouse work isn't fun. My employer has a large number scattered across the
country and picking and stocking requires some hustle to meet customer
demands; ours is more sensitive as we pull for both overnight and on demand.
Still there are many people who keep these jobs for years, if not using them
as a springboard into better positions within the company (most of our older
executives came from pullers). Amazon may or not have a path out of their
warehouses, I don't know

------
stevewillows
What would be amazing is if Amazon provided their own shelter for the
employees who are taking on the odd shifts. It would give a double incentive
to stay clean and work hard. Of course there's an additional expense to this,
but if they want to go above and beyond with this particular issue, this could
be the first step to a real answer.

~~~
saurik
I dunno.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_town](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_town)

~~~
stevewillows
ha. That's more extreme. I was thinking more toward a hostel.

------
ars
> "It may even hurt you ... pay your rent, and then all of a sudden the floor
> drops out from under you. There could be an eviction, which could hurt
> chances of landing an apartment later.

Or, you know, just leave when you can't pay the rent?

Is that not an option? Or do they not expect homeless to be able to do that?

~~~
rtkwe
Leaving before your lease is up usually has financial penalties and terms
shorter than 1 year are more expensive for the exact same apartment.

~~~
jpindar
Really cheap housing (which is generally all you can afford on minimum wage)
often doesn't have a yearly lease, in fact many places charge weekly.

~~~
rtkwe
Ah, I've never seen or really studied that low end of the market.

------
lips
All political ballyhoo aside, I see this as just a 1/2 baked plan. They had a
goal, they apparently didn't look for the big picture or consult with
appropriate sources for advise, and they failed. Regardless of any moral or
political judgements, it doesn't reflect well on them.

~~~
itgoon
If they keep trying, and learning from their mistakes, I'll be happy to forget
the initial missteps.

------
Xtianah
Emotionalism in the workplace spells disaster. Why hire the homeless simply
because they're homeless and we need to help them? What they need is rehab not
jobs. Give the to the graduates who need them.

------
itgoon
It seems to me that an opportunity presents itself: work with the shelters on
ingress/egress issues. Amazon should be pretty good at it by now.

If it makes it easier for both sides to get what they want, it's not even that
big of an expense.

------
Xtianah
Emotionalism is the assassin of professionalism.

------
rustynails
I took it as a positive. It's an opportunity for homeless people to be given a
chance. As long as the lessons are learned.

That's a fascinating web site and interesting article. They use the term
"people" a lot (great!), but refer specifically to only women being impacted
(bad but very PC), "She said she and the other women in her shelter felt
burned". That might be that the shelter is a female only shelter, but it's
very common.. However, I read about 10 articles on that site. They were only
about women or a black man... Very interesting. On the surface, it looks like
a prejudiced website (PC on steroids).

On a side note, Australian Bureau of Statistics says that ~70% of homeless
people are men, but most articles in Australia talk about the plight of
homeless women. I wonder if that becomes self-fulfilling: extreme sexism in
the media means that homeless men are neglected for Political Correctness'
sake.

Personally, I think most media have a lot to answer for in driving prejudice
as hard as they can, especially in the last few years. While some call for a
men's movement, I see how much feminism drives sexism - and we don't need more
sexism driven by gender based movements. We need society to universally
condemn prejudice.

~~~
jonas21
The article mentions that Amazon was working with the YWCA a number of times.
The "W" in YWCA stands for women [1], so it's very likely that this was a
women's shelter or at the very least a program targeted toward women. So it's
unsurprising that the article refers to women being impacted, and I would
hardly attribute it sexism or "political correctness".

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YWCA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YWCA)

------
alexashka
Sounds like a half-hearted effort, resulting in predictable outcomes.

