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...
Amazon is doing pretty well due to the quarantine (as they deserve to given the services they provide). Them having to reduce their share of the profits from these extraordinary times is not particularly noble, but rather just average.
The United States hasn't even passed the first stage of Corona yet (in SF, daily number of deaths is still rising). It is too early to mandate come backs.
Here in SF, multiple employees at 3 Whole Foods locations have already contracted Covid. Amazon has not done nearly enough thus far. The fact that they are now providing masks and cleaning up door handles is again, a bare minimum.
They should let exigent time off policies rein for at least 2 more months, before going back to business as normal policies.
Please realize, that even despite all of the above, their profits will keep rising through this period; there is no reason to think of them as victims, when they very much so are winners in this situation. Foregoing just a little bit of your extra profits to ensure your workers stay healthy in unprecedented times of a pandemic is not asking for too much.
>The United States hasn't even passed the first stage of Corona yet (in SF, daily number of deaths is still rising). It is too early to mandate come backs.
Considering multiple states are larger than many European countries, I don't think it's appropriate to treat the US as a monolithic entity with respect to virus containment. Even if all of the states reacted identically, time and space dictate that different regions will be in different stages at any given time.
> Total death counts in the US are still going up.
It depends on the state, though. New deaths are decreasing in many States, including Washington, Texas, and California [1]. Looking at the US, as a whole, isn't really useful here.
This is ridiculous. I don't understand the defensiveness.
The United States is a nation. It has a federal government and federal bodies which are responsible for preventing spread of disease.
People can travel freely within these bounds without passports or visas or checkpoints.
Of course states have their own rules, and this is good, and yes, some states are doing better than others, but why the fear of revealing the incompetence of one nation?
This is how nation-states work in 2020 on planet Earth.
The European Union also has a federal government and federal bodies which pass policies. It has a directly elected lower house that represents the People with proportional representation[1], and an upper house that represents the Member States with equal representation[2], and an executive branch with a Chief Executive that signs bills into law[3].
People can travel freely within Member States without passports, visas, or checkpoints.
Of course, Member States have their own rules, and this is good, and yes, some Member States are doing better than others, but why the fear of revealing the incompetence of one Union?
This is how Unions work in 2020 on planet Earth.
I think we both agree that looking at the EU as a whole is totally meaningless in the context of the current discussion about Amazon workers. We are simply arguing the same about the United States. This isn’t some pro-US propaganda, the only agenda here is an insistence on ensuring that we are comparing apples to apples.
P.S. Speaking of "Nation-States", hilariously enough, Gavin Newsom recently referred to California as a "Nation State"[4].
> It has a federal government and federal bodies which are responsible for preventing spread of disease.
The response is handled at the state level, not the federal level. The federal level can provide advice and help coordinate actions between states / provide backup resources, but isn't meant to take direct action.
This isn't about defensiveness. You state that, collectively, the US is still in stage one, and then go on to say that this is evidence for a poor response and that it's early to recommend returns to work.
This is invalid, because for example a couple of states could be bring the total number up. Further, again because of the scale of the US, policy appropriate for one state may not be appropriate for others.
Again, the issue here is treating the gigantic US, a mishmash of cultures in 50 states with semiautonomous governments, as a monolithic entity. If you evaluate response policy in this way you're not going to get a good signal.
What do you expect one state is supposed to do if another is bringing the numbers up due to their autonomous choices? It's just not useful to consider the US as a single entity in matters where states maintain control over most relevant measures. No one is denying the numbers, but it seems rather strange to lump (with respect to the matter) largely independent entities together. If you're trying to make a point, then make that point directly where it applies.
> The United States hasn't even passed the first stage of Corona yet (in SF, daily number of deaths is still rising). It is too early to mandate come backs.
That isn't true according to the numbers from https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/en. Do you have a citation for that? Numbers for new deaths have been hovering between 0 and 5 for the last month in SF, SF has had a total of 22 people dead, due to successful lockdown measures it basically never hit SF.
Deaths is not a metric that can determine which stage of this pandemic we are in. Immunity is the figure you're looking for, which will not increase under a shelter-in-place order. Deaths are down, but will immediately shoot back up if the shelter-in-place is lifted.
The only goal posts you should care about are herd immunity or vaccination. Nothing else matters when discussing how much longer this pandemic will last.
edit: Wow you guys are really mad at me judging by all these downvotes. You're right, the pandemic is over, lift the stay-at-home orders!
For a long time I thought HN had higher quality discussion than Reddit, but in reality it's just the same BS with slightly larger words.
I think people are hoping for a third option: driving the infection rate low enough that it can be contained going forward with testing and contact tracing. Whether it’s realistic to think that can be achieved in an acceptable timeframe, I don’t know.
My understanding is the end game for that is still a vaccine or herd immunity. It just slows the process down enough that you don’t have more people dying because of a lack of equipment.
> Deaths is not a metric that can determine which stage of this pandemic we are in. Immunity is the figure you're looking for, which will not increase under a shelter-in-place order. Deaths are down, but will immediately shoot back up if the shelter-in-place is lifted.
Absolutely not. If you believe enough information is known about herd-immunity in relation to Corona, you are dangerously misinformed.
Please don't play the "I thought you people were smarter" card if you're being downvoted for spreading misinformation.
Number of deaths DO matter in relation to:
1. Human suffering (perhaps the most important metric)
2. Learning how we prevent further deaths (calculating hospital and materials dissemination needs)
I'm spreading misinformation by saying deaths per week won't tell us what stage of the pandemic we're in?
> Number of deaths DO matter in relation to: 1. Human suffering (perhaps the most important metric) 2. Learning how we prevent further deaths (calculating hospital and materials dissemination needs)
Did I ever suggest otherwise? Literally all I said about "number of deaths" was that it does not tell us how close we are to the pandemic being over. You just brought up a bunch of other stuff to feel good about yourself.
I really did think you people were smarter though. Apparently you haven't even learned how to read something before you reply to it.
> If you believe enough information is known about herd-immunity in relation to Corona, you are dangerously misinformed.
Again, I never said anything about this. Please learn how to read. I'm not claiming to know how we reach the level of "herd immunity" we need to get out of this. I just said "herd immunity" or a vaccine would be the solution here. Am I wrong about that? Jesus fucking christ, the only thing HN does better than Reddit is self-righteousness and smug asshats.
People not getting COVID-19 immunity after recovery seems an extraordinary claim that would require very strong evidence for me to take seriously.
How do you believe people recover from COVID-19?
The fact that you recover from it at all, and generate measurable antibodies in the process, and that humans generally gain some level of immunity to all the other coronaviruses we're plagued by weights my belief strongly towards at least short term immunity being very likely.
I downvoted because I'm not currently aware of a current usable metric for immunity and because you didn't link to one. It's obvious to me too that the pandemic isn't over but deaths is (to my knowledge) the best proxy for all the other metrics that we currently have, due to lack of consistent testing.
I tend to agree.. It's not on employers to support their employees - it's on governments to support their citizens.
Amazon will get lambasted in the press, but this isn't an issue to be fixed employer by employer but rather by the government, which needs to provide safety nets like universal healthcare or living wage
In other countries employers have a duty of care towards their employees, they just can't use them up until they aren't good any longer. I note there are continuous reports about dozens of people falling sick with coronavirus at Amazon warehouses, and in the past there reports of were ambulances parked outside Amazon facilities because it's cheaper to cart someone off to the hospital with heatstroke than to provide proper air conditioning.
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.
> 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.
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?
In what way am I in the wrong? I did not claim and do not believe that there is only one level of 'forced'. No one here is making it out to be that way.
Edit: Just because there is a range of accepted meanings for the word 'forced' doesn't mean that all uses of the word 'forced' are correct. Even with the most low key interpretations of the word 'forced', I don't think that this is in any way the correct word for this situation.
> What's a few avoidable deaths between friends, after all?
Amazon is about as close to the ideal of an "essential employer" as anyone is, though. They're shipping a huge amount of food and other essentials. Objectively, a package delivered through a managed professional environment is less risky and involves fewer potential transmission events than one purchased at retail.
Online sellers, where they have product to deliver, are the ones we want to prioritize keeping open.
Now... there's lots to complain about with Amazon's response in other ways. It's very reasonable to argue that their workers need more PPE, employer-provided testing and notification, hazard pay, better safety practices, etc...
But if you want to argue that Amazon should shut down... who do you want to be open instead?
I'm glad I waited an extra minute to comment b/c you did all the work. Amazon has allowed me to limit my local travels to two physical environments for essentially the past six weeks. There's a value to that in reducing transmission.
> By requiring others to do that for you and paying them pennies for what value they're providing.
The median wage of an Amazon Warehouse worker is about $60,000 / year, which is above the median wage in the US[1]. The 25th-percentile wage for the same worker is $53,000 — still higher than the median wage, and this is an entry level position that requires no college eduction.
Amazon also provides 401(k) matching for their warehouse workers and provides them the same group health insurance as their software engineers and executives[2][3]. It is quite possibly the most generous set of benefits currently available to an entry-level low-skill worker with no college education.
> I'd agree with you if the company decided to not take profit during this time and paid the employees the same amount of value they produce.
Couple things: 1) I think you're overestimating how much profit Amazon makes on its retail business; the margins are razor thin. 2) profit is just the cost of labor for the managers, I.e. the people that are coordinating the labor and calling the high-level shots. This includes coming up with the policies and systems to ensure the company can continue to operate in the midst of a global pandemic.
Finally, Amazon employed 798,000 people as of 2019, and added 100,000 new jobs in the last month alone, with 50,000 current openings outstanding. A lot of the margin goes into literally providing all of these wages and benefits for nearly 1 million people. This is more than many industrialized nations.
The first number is so laughably far away from reality. Do you have any idea how many hours a week you would have to work to make $60k at $15/hr? Does the average warehouse worker make double the starting rate or work 70 hour weeks?
As someone who works in the industry I do agree however that they do an okay job taking care of their people compared to others. But nobody is going to write an article about how shit it is to work at a warehouse owned by a company no one has ever heard of. Amazon has actually done a lot for people at those places too though, if there is an amazon warehouse nearby starting at $15 an hour nobody is going to come work for you for barely above minimum wage anymore, it has definitely put some out competitive wage pressure.
Like I said, they can fix the problem. It sounds like they're trying, but it's not proven that they've gotten all the way. In the past they were clearly inadequate and it's why employees went on strike and publicly protested.
"Essential employees" shouldn't be put at risk just because people need them to ship stuff out. We shouldn't put "essential employees"' immune-compromised relatives at risk either.
> "Essential employees" shouldn't be put at risk just because people need them to ship stuff out.
But... isn't that what "essential" means? No one claims this is fair. It's not fair that as software developers we get an automatic pass to continue our careers working from home while our bartender friends have to file for unemployment either.
But at the end of the day we need stuff to live. Someone needs to run the power and intenet and water infrastructure. And someone needs to deliver goods to people who need them.
I mean: I agree we need to make this better for those folks. I just don't see how Amazon demanding essential workers come to work is the wrong thing here.
I don't know about that, but there'd definitely be newspaper headlines about the number of workers testing positive implying that it's somehow Amazon's fault. We've already seen this with one of Amazon's NYC warehouses (over numbers that seem very much in line with NYC in general), various food manufacturers, etc. Apparently some meat-packing companies are now reluctant to test any of their workers because of the bad publicity and the damage it does - they'd rather just close down the entire site.
COVID tests aren't DNA tests. It's a swab of the back of your throat (through the nose, oof) to test for a specific virus. It's not hard to find the specific stuff used to perform the tests, it's out there on the internet, the CDC published it. Are we really descending into paranoia about Amazon trying to genetically profile employees?
There's a big population of people who just start from the premise that Amazon must be doing something wrong and search for facts to justify it. I lost my ability to assume good faith when people complained they should pay $15 an hour, they started paying $15 an hour, and then the controversy immediately restarted about how greedy they are to not pay more.
I'm pretty sure they could start paying a minimum wage of $30 an hour and people would be irate that they're making it impossible to hire anyone because Amazon is overpaying. When you're the biggest player there is nowhere to hide.
This probably won't be too far off, if the current level of unemployment benefits holds. Just the $600 a week on top of state benefits comes out to $15/hr.
Never mind the fact that Amazon does 401(k) matching and provides its warehouse workers the same group health insurance plan as their software engineers, which might possibly be the most generous health insurance plan for an entry-level position that requires no college degree.
I'm right there with you... I don't like Trump, even if I agree on a lot of policy actions/choices, but the guy can't have a good day with a lot of people. So many are outright lying to push an agenda over truth, and you can't really rely on anyone to be informed anymore.
Right now, I'm much more concerned that we're on the brink of war with China and Iran... partly because China sees us as weakened over COVID, I'm not sure on Iran's motivations right now either... With how much of our tech comes from taiwan, it's really concerning... this could literally set the world back a decade for a decade.
Correct, because SARS-CoV-2 is an RNA virus and contains no DNA. But the test does work by detecting the viral RNA and it is hard to find the specific stuff (reagents) to perform the test and that's a big reason why we're all sheltering in place without a proper nationwide testing regime.
They are not forcing them since they are allowed to take time off. You can't self quarantine forever anyways, standard procedure is 14 days of quarantine if you think you may have been exposed to the virus or if you have any symptoms.
Unpaid time off. How are people supposed to eat and pay rent if their only available leave is unpaid? How will they afford their hospital bills after being exposed?
I'm not sure why that makes it okay to add to that population? Amazon has the resources to temporarily cover paid leave until they can guarantee safe conditions in their warehouses for employees. Regions that have prematurely relaxed their virus controls have seen new outbreaks, the same could happen in warehouses. It's in everyone's best interest for Amazon to offer paid leave until their workplaces have been proven to be safe, which is going to take a bit even after all the appropriate measures are in place.
The safety net is by far the better way to address this, it's a drop in the bucket relative to the total cost of the safety net.
> It's in everyone's best interest for Amazon to offer paid leave until their workplaces have been proven to be safe, which is going to take a bit even after all the appropriate measures are in place.
Amazon appears to think that your "until" condition is here now, per the safety measures they purport to be taking.
Yeah, I don’t see how few extra bucks is worth literally risking life. Total numbers look big but really it’s $120 more per each shift where you can be exposed or expose others to a deadly virus.
>What's a few avoidable deaths between friends, after all?
There is no vaccine coming for a year, maybe two, maybe never. "Flattening the curve" is ONLY a delaying strategy to not swamp the health-care system and hope that some treatments are developed (no guarantees there either). COVID is going to be part of our lives.
Are you saying we should shelter in place forever?
>A starting point would be Amazon providing tests
What tests? Are you expecting every employer to test their workers every day?
>along with ensuring everyone has masks and gloves and enough time to thoroughly wash their hands throughout their shift.
That's reasonable. Masks + social distancing + gloves, and policies for hand washing and disinfecting of commonly used surfaces. I suspect Amazon isn't too far from that, and if they are it's only because of the global PPE shortage.
IMO a starting point is: Single test for all employees before return to work, 100% guarantee that everyone has a mask for their shifts, the facility has ventilation, and they have gloves. 100% guarantee that facilities have soap and running water.
In the past all of what I mention has been a problem in warehouses, and it's why employees are protesting. Amazon can fix this, but it's been a problem very recently.
It's super reasonable if they can't gather up a bunch of N95s and medical grade gloves, but paper surgical masks or cloth masks should be feasible by now. It sounds like they're working on their own testing infrastructure, which is great.
Amazon is doing pretty well due to the quarantine (as they deserve to given the services they provide). Them having to reduce their share of the profits from these extraordinary times is not particularly noble, but rather just average.
The United States hasn't even passed the first stage of Corona yet (in SF, daily number of deaths is still rising). It is too early to mandate come backs.
Here in SF, multiple employees at 3 Whole Foods locations have already contracted Covid. Amazon has not done nearly enough thus far. The fact that they are now providing masks and cleaning up door handles is again, a bare minimum.
They should let exigent time off policies rein for at least 2 more months, before going back to business as normal policies.
Please realize, that even despite all of the above, their profits will keep rising through this period; there is no reason to think of them as victims, when they very much so are winners in this situation. Foregoing just a little bit of your extra profits to ensure your workers stay healthy in unprecedented times of a pandemic is not asking for too much.