[throw_m239339]

> Honest question, if you were running Amazon, how do you protect against bad actors or poor performers?

define poor performers.

I've work for abusive corporations that were setting impossible goals and called employees "poor performers" and fired them when these impossible goals were not met.

[rufus_foreman]

If the goals are impossible and they fire people who don't meet them, who does the work?

[pseudalopex]

They assign or enforce the impossible goals selectively.

[rufus_foreman]

That doesn't make sense. If it's impossible no one can do it.

[nomel]

I believe that's where the selection comes in. You only select those you want to doom to failure/remove.

[lardo]

Whoever has the worst alternative.

[bluedino]

Employees who produce less than others. Say John packs 50% as many orders as Jim. Should he be fired?

[yifanl]

Depends on what that means in absolute terms, how many Jims can you expect to hire?

[bell-cot]

And we know that John is not getting handed the bigger / tougher orders to pack while Jim is cherry-picking the easy ones, and ... ?

[judge2020]

And so defining the level of work required in law is usually not going to help anyone. This is why unions exist - so the people that know the workplace and subject matter best can negotiate to make the job fair.

[kelnos]

... which is the ridiculous thing. As much as unions do have problems, I think a better fix to all of this would be a law that just said "all warehouse employees must be a member of an independent labor union". Amazon has fought tooth and nail to keep their warehouse workers out of unions.

(I don't love this sort of law, but it'll probably give these workers a better outcome than they have now, and likely a better outcome than the law that we're talking about here.)