|
|
|
|
|
|
by 23B1
729 days ago
|
|
|
1. Proportionality. Fines should be proportional to the company's size, revenue, and the severity of the violation. The financial impact should be significant enough to grab the company's attention and incentivize change. 2. Escalating penalties. Implement a system of escalating penalties for repeated violations w/increased monitoring. 3. Transparency. Publicly disclose the details of labor violations and the fines imposed. 4. Targeted sanctions. Temporary suspension of licenses, government contracts, at local, state & federal level. 5. Victim comp. Ensure that a portion of fines go towards comping the affected workers. |
|
|
This is a fine for a local violation. Trying to make it proportional to the entire company's size (which expands far beyond those locations and even business types) would be insane.
The fines are calculated in proportion to the estimated damage and potential profits.
> Escalating penalties. Implement a system of escalating penalties for repeated violations w/increased monitoring.
Fines for repeat violations would be higher, so no need to be upset.
> Transparency. Publicly disclose the details of labor violations and the fines imposed.
Literally in the article. Did anyone read the article? Why are we upset about things that are already explained in the article?
> Targeted sanctions. Temporary suspension of licenses, government contracts, at local, state & federal level.
You want to suspend the Amazon warehouse's license for their first violation for not properly disclosing quotas in writing?
Do you have any idea what happens when you do this? The people employed there are laid off. They lose their jobs. Why would anyone assume that you can just shut down companies and the only people who suffer are some abstract group of executives somewhere?