Amazon ups hourly wage to $15, will advocate for higher pay

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Have you asked them?
NBC did and they're not all happy.

Thank you for the lecture, but you shouldn't assume you know where I stand from a few comments on a board about books.

The question is did NBC interview all the employees involved and what percentage prefer the old way versus the new?

When I read quotes like “We’ve heard from our hourly fulfillment and customer service employees that they prefer the predictability and immediacy of cash to RSUs,” should I assume Amazon is lying?

None of us has enough data to know which way is better for the employees impacted.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

Thank you for the lecture, but you shouldn't assume you know where I stand from a few comments on a board about books.

The question is did NBC interview all the employees involved and what percentage prefer the old way versus the new?

When I read quotes like “We’ve heard from our hourly fulfillment and customer service employees that they prefer the predictability and immediacy of cash to RSUs,” should I assume Amazon is lying?

None of us has enough data to know which way is better for the employees impacted.

You should assume that quotes like that have an agenda and wording is critical. It is true, they most definitely heard from some undisclosed portion of disgruntled workers that they rather have a higher hourly pay. Why should NBC be held to a higher standard than Amazon in that matter? NBC only had to find a few that did not get asked beforehand to prove that there wasn't a vote or survey involved. (*)

ETA: (*) Of course, there could have been a survey conducted, but only cherry picked employees got asked. Amazon could have easily (if it is even true) rectified the situation by saying that the majority wanted a pay raise, but they didn't.

[Apache]

There isn't a company around that does not have disgruntled employees. And at different times there are different disgruntled employees. I would be surprised if there weren't disgruntled employees at a company paying employees $100,000.00 and hour.
Apache

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Apache

There isn't a company around that does not have disgruntled employees. And at different times there are different disgruntled employees. I would be surprised if there weren't disgruntled employees at a company paying employees $100,000.00 and hour.
Apache

Especially at a company employing well over a half million people with very different skill sets and compensation packages.

And you are correct, there exist employees making that kind of money (through stock options and grants) and some are still upset enough to quit.

The "problem" with Amazon salaries was never an HR problem but rather a political problem so they attacked it like a politician does things: give with one hand while taking with the other.

They just timed the announcements to maximum effect.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Apache

There isn't a company around that does not have disgruntled employees. And at different times there are different disgruntled employees. I would be surprised if there weren't disgruntled employees at a company paying employees $100,000.00 and hour.
Apache

While that is certainly true, Amazon doesn't exactly have a reputation as a great place to work where employees are treated well and respected as assets. Amazon is basically trying to take the fact that they have to pay more to get someone to work for them than other companies and spin that as a positive. They are also trying to do the rent seeking thing (Amazon has the biggest lobby in Washington) and get government to drive up the cost for their competitors.

In general, minimum wage is a way for unskilled labor to get their foot in the door, gaining experience and skills. Few people stay at minimum wage for long.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Amazon doesn't exactly have a reputation as a great place to work where employees are treated well and respected as assets.

According to who, specifically?

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

According to who, specifically?

According to the countless hordes of complainers, maybe?

I am complaining about my work. Because I have to go to work to pay my bills.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

According to the countless hordes of complainers, maybe?

I am complaining about my work. Because I have to go to work to pay my bills.

That's what I was thinking.

Let's face it: for every person who complained to the media about Amazon's "horrible employment practices", there are countless others who—while maybe not ecstatic with their current situation—are content to come to work and do their job without being overly bitter about their lot (and just maybe a few are ecstatic). But nobody wants to talk to those people. They're boring.

So what we have are articles generated by the testimony of a handful of ne'er-do-wells and as a result, Amazon has a reputation of "mistreatment and a lack of human decency and/or respect."

Sorry, but I'm not buying it. I don't think Amazon farts rainbows or anything like that, but I believe their compensation packages have always been well within (if not above) the norm for similar jobs in other companies.

Compensation has never been based on what a particular company can afford to pay its employees.

[Apache]

If you look up the worst companies to work for Amazon isn't even close to being the worst and yet reading this thread makes it seem like they must be the slightly better than being employed by Satan as a greeter to Hell.
Here is a list of 15 by Cheat Sheet.
https://www.cheatsheet.com/money-car...mployees.html/
Apache

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by Apache

...being employed by Satan as a greeter to Hell.

Apache

Your job offer sounds interesting. Tell me more...

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

According to who, specifically?

According to "The Everything Store: Jeff Bezos and the Age of Internet" for one.

https://www.amazon.com/Everything-St...erything+store

and the NY Times for another
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/t...workplace.html

(try googling Amazon crying at desk for more such stories)

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Apache

If you look up the worst companies to work for Amazon isn't even close to being the worst and yet reading this thread makes it seem like they must be the slightly better than being employed by Satan as a greeter to Hell.
Here is a list of 15 by Cheat Sheet.
https://www.cheatsheet.com/money-car...mployees.html/
Apache

I take best and worst companies to work for lists with a huge grain of salt. I regularly get emails from management to go vote for the company as a best place to work for.

There are a lot of businesses that are lousy places to work. Just because a company isn't on to 15 worse places list doesn't make it a great place to work, any more than not being on the top 15 places to work makes a company a lousy place to work.

I'm not real surprised that Kroger is on the list, since most of the local Krogers aren't exactly filled with happy employees who greet shoppers with a smile. On the other hand, I'm told that Krogers up in Ohio, where Kroger is based, are much better and are rated much higher with the local shoppers. Sometimes the further you get from the headquarters, the more variable the experience.

Companies tend to rise and fall as good or bad places to work over time as well as management focus changes and as employees feel secure in their job verses that they might get laid off any day.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

Your job offer sounds interesting. Tell me more...

Being a greeter is likely a much better situation than being the greeted!

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

(try googling Amazon crying at desk for more such stories)

Why? What do I care about people who shouldn't be working in competitive environments?

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Being a greeter is likely a much better situation than being the greeted!