|
In the programming world, businesses with high turnover are called sweatshops. The whole business model is to hire someone, work him or her like a dog until they quit and then hire someone else. Typically in a sweatshop like that, you have a core of people who keep the continuity and who have either learned how to manage the work, or simply like the lifestyle. I worked in such a place for five years (start up where the stock options turned out to be not quite as lucrative as hoped for). So, no, it's not just the elephant coolies who end up in jobs with high levels of turnovers. What makes the Amazon story somewhat different is the level of back biting and callous ruthlessness that was described.
I also agree the earlier post that pointed out that just because someone else does it, doesn't make it all right. That argument didn't even work with my mother when I was a little kid.
I think ultimately, assuming that the stories are true, the only thing that will change the culture is if the publicity hurts Amazon, both from a hiring point of view and a consumer point of view. I suspect that given that Amazon doesn't have any serious competition as a one stop online shop, the consumers won't punish them. I think it is more likely that it will hurt them from a hiring point of view. Good programmers rarely want to work in sweatshops.
|