[JumpCrisscross]

> if Amazon is guilty of heinous crimes for not giving workers a strict written quota

The issue isn’t having or not having quotas. It’s having a quota and not telling employees about it.

[bpodgursky]

Why is this a meaningful difference?

Any at-will employer could stack-rank and cut the lowest 5% of workers every month. Or adjust the quota every month at the 5th percentile. There's literally no difference to workers, it's always "make sure you are a bit better than the people other people applying for the job.

[lokar]

Because you are also not allowed quotas that won’t accommodate rest breaks. If the quota is secret you can’t enforce breaks.

[spaceguillotine]

This is pretty close to what temp agencies do at tech companies, i witnessed it at Google with multiple agencies and production quotas.

[maximinus_thrax]

Did you read the article?

> “Undisclosed quotas expose workers to increased pressure to work faster and can lead to higher injury rates and other violations by forcing workers to skip breaks,”

What you're saying about:

> make sure you are a bit better than the people other people applying for the job.

Is literally that. It just adds pressure which leads to accidents. When you don't know the playing field, you're going to assume the worst and then work yourself to death. It's sad to see HN defending this approach.