How Amazon keeps costs low...

[Dannyalcatraz]

It would be too costly to do so

I understand you're not the policy-maker on this.

When your business model is predicated largely on having ultra-low prices, high costs cannot be used as an excuse. Find the money: raise your prices so you can afford better thermal controls; move operations into a more modernized warehouse; cut executive salaries/bonuses.

Because an OSHA investigation could cost more than more powerful AC systems.

 

[Mallus]

I'm pretty sure 90% of the people who post on Gawker are unaware that Blue Collar work is not all puppies and rainbows or as utopic as working for a Apple store as a "genius," sitting at a office desk twittling their fingers and surfing the internet, or ignoring a customer like a blue-shirt at the local bestbuy.

Maybe... but I associate that sort of in-a-bubble cluelessness with the significantly rich and Congresspeople. I don't think any aspect of Gawker Media is really elite --they're just snarky-- and at a far remove from the working-class world, though I could be wrong.

I don't think its so much an issue of the heat itself- which may still be an OSHA violation, whether deemed wussy or not- but the disciplining of those who had to seek medical treatment. At least, that's where I have the biggest problem.

That's the egregious part for me too. I don't expect warehouse work to be pleasant, but writing workers up for serious and medically verified work-related illness is unconscionable, as is encouraging workers not to seek medical aid where things like heat stroke are on the line.

Find the money: raise your prices so you can afford better thermal controls; move operations into a more modernized warehouse; cut executive salaries/bonuses.

The killer is Amazon has to be in the position where they can afford to do this. Their customer base is enormous, and the discounts they offer on many products is so deep as to give them a lot of pricing leeway.

I'd happily have my discount reduced from %25 to %20 if it meant situations like this didn't occur.

 

[Holy Bovine]

The minimum wage in Australia is $15.51 an hour. I wouldn't call a $3.26 difference 'far below'. There's also the cost of living to take into account. The cost of living in Australia is significantly higher than it is in America.

In the article the wages are "up to" 12.25 an hour. I would bet 1000 times that that less than 1% of new hires come anywhere near $12.25/hour. Minimum wage across the USA averages approximately $7.50/hour with a low of 5.15 (Georgia & Wyoming) and a high of 8.67/hour (Washington). Some states have no minimum wage at all. Wikipedia List of US Minimum Wages

Employers will always save money whereever they can. It is the nature of business. Where did people think those 30% discounts were coming from anyways?!?

 

[Bullgrit]

Maybe I just missed it, but I didn't see anywhere in the articles any actual facts. Just some hearsay.

I'm not defending Amazon -- hell, I rarely have ever bought anything through them -- but I don't judge any company by what a media outlets says some folks have said about it.

Remember, many folks have killed themselves and others over D&D. That's true, right? It's been in reported in the media many times over many years.

Bullgrit

 

[Mallus]

Where did people think those 30% discounts were coming from anyways?!?

I kinda hoped they weren't coming from slow-roasting their warehouse employees... perhaps I'm an optimist after all, eh?

Maybe I just missed it, but I didn't see anywhere in the articles any actual facts. Just some hearsay.

The story in the local paper --hardly Big Media-- cities numerous interviews with employees, former employees, a doctor at the local hospital, and obtained documentation on the OSHA complaints. Looks like sound journalism to me. What kind of facts were you looking for?

If the basic facts of the article were in question, Amazon would be issuing denials and threats of legal action, not bland press releases stressing their commitment to worker safety and the (small) steps they did take to improve conditions.

Remember, many folks have killed themselves and others over D&D. That's true, right? It's been in reported in the media many times over many years.

A healthy dose of skepticism regarding various media outlets is healthy, but not everything printed in the papers is a lie. For instance, have you heard we've sent men to Moon?

(thoughI understand some people still don't quite believe it)

 

[jimmifett]

Warehouses in general can be pretty hot, esp depending on location. When I was much younger and laid off during the tech bust, in the armpit portion of central florida, I got a job at a plastics extrusion plant just so I wouldn't be a moocher leeching of unemployment benefits. It was pretty hot, although had open doors. Unfortunately, not being near the ocean, little breeze, and surrounded by thousands of small lakes, so high humidity. On top of that, add in the stench of melted/burned plastic. Couldn't gid rid of the smell in my nose for 2 weeks. I only lasted 4 hours ($9/hr or so) before I quit. Combination of the heat making me want to faint, the smell, and my asthma, I just couldn't hack it, but I have great respect for those that had been working there years. They are made of more determined stuff than I in that regard. Never did cash the check for 4 hours of work, I never felt I deserved it.

Needless to say, I was back looking for more work the next day and had a new programming gig within the week in one of the bigger neighboring cities.

To head any one off about $9/hr in bad conditions nonsense, it was unskilled labor. I could easily have replaced my repetitive job with a suficiently designed robot provided it was cheap enough to design and cheap enough to operate. By agreeing to $9/hr, I was in agreement with my employer that my time, skills, mental, and physical exertions I would expend matched the price the company was willing to pay as applied for that job. When I was no longer in agreement with that valuation, I quit and found a more valuated skill with which to use and an employer who agreed with my self assessment.

 

[Relique du Madde]

I'd happily have my discount reduced from %25 to %20 if it meant situations like this didn't occur.

Employers will always save money whereever they can. It is the nature of business. Where did people think those 30% discounts were coming from anyways?!?

Well considering that retail prices are usually marked up so that the business receives at least 25% profit from selling the item, the 30% discount can be set from an arbitrary "This price is the most someone would buy this item at in order to maximize your profit according to our research" mark aka the suggested retail price.

Those large discounts often result from "This product isn't selling and we need to get rid of it so let's mark it at 30% discount an hope no one notices that the suggested retail price and the current sale price is the same as it was last week." People like discount signs so they will buy even if the 30% discount means that the shop would receive 50% profit instead of 60%.

If that doesn't work, the item is nearing an expiration date, is about to be obsolete by iProduct v +1, or was collecting dust too long, then the business may actually be forced to actually lower the price down to the unit price. If they go below that then, hopefully they received enough profit from something else to cover the amount they lost with the product.

 

[Bullgrit]

The story in the local paper --hardly Big Media-- cities numerous interviews with employees, former employees, a doctor at the local hospital, and obtained documentation on the OSHA complaints. Looks like sound journalism to me. What kind of facts were you looking for?

(Emphasis mine.) I didn't see mention of any OSHA documentation. I read that a doctor said he contacted OSHA, but that's it.

A healthy dose of skepticism regarding various media outlets is healthy, but not everything printed in the papers is a lie.

I don't approach all articles with immediate skepticism, but when I read an article that gives only hearsay, it brings out the doubter in me. The article presented virtually no facts, at all.

I mean, if an article talked about the danger of an particular street intersection in town, and didn't present anything but the impressions of what people said about the intersection, wouldn't you wonder why no facts were given about how many accidents, or the amount of traffic, or something?

As someone who has written articles, and even been the secondary subject of an article, I guess I just notice vague weasel-wording easily. "Some people say there have been many accidents...," is not nearly as convincing as, "Police reports show there have been 15 accidents..."

For instance, have you heard we've sent men to Moon?

Articles on our Moon visits offer more than just, "People who work or used to work at NASA have told us they sent manned missions the the moon...."

Bullgrit

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I didn't see mention of any OSHA documentation. I read that a doctor said he contacted OSHA, but that's it.

If he didn't actually make the reports, or made reports with falsified info, he could lose his license AND do jail time.

Besides, you may want to re-read the article:

OSHA, which investigated conditions at the warehouse, told Amazon that the way the warehouse was run had "the potential to adversely impact" employee safety and health.

IOW, they got the doc's report, felt it had credence, investigated, and contacted Amazon about possible violations.

So many ambulances responded to medical assistance calls at the warehouse during a heat wave in May, the paper said, that the retailer paid Cetronia Ambulance Corps to have paramedics and ambulances stationed outside the warehouse during several days of excess heat over the summer. About 15 people were taken to hospitals, while 20 or 30 more were treated right there, the ambulance chief told The Call.

I think the ambulance chief has zero reason to lie.

 

[Bullgrit]

zero reason to lie

*sigh* *facepalm*

I didn't accuse anyone of lying. Not the interviewees, not the journalist, no one. You can write a perfectly honest report and be wrong. Journalists do it all the time. We, as people, do it all the time. We jump to incorrect conclusions. We believe stories that match our prejudices. Etc. This is why I was asking where the facts were.

I clicked the link in the OP and saw that the article was referencing an original article, so instead of reading the regurgitation, I went to the original article. (It's usually better to read the original than to read someone's rewrite of it.)

I didn't see any facts in the original article. But...

So many ambulances responded to medical assistance calls at the warehouse during a heat wave in May, the paper said, that the retailer paid Cetronia Ambulance Corps to have paramedics and ambulances stationed outside the warehouse during several days of excess heat over the summer. About 15 people were taken to hospitals, while 20 or 30 more were treated right there, the ambulance chief told The Call.

Seeing this, here, I thought, There's some facts. How did I miss this?

I went back to the Yahoo! article and read it all. Ah, there it is. But I didn't see that in the original article. I went back to the original article and read it again. But those facts were not on the page.

I looked around more on the page, and that's when I discovered the links to all 9 pages of the article. Between all the ads spaced through the article text, and the links to the Featured Articles sections, I hadn't noticed the page links. And the facts I wanted were on those other pages.

Maybe I just missed it, but I didn't see anywhere in the articles any actual facts.

So, you see, I just missed it, like I wondered.

Interesting, though, how folks responding to me assume that I'm a skeptic and/or I think someone was lying, rather than that I just missed something -- like I mentioned in the first sentence of my post. This whole misunderstanding could have been cleared up with someone mentioning that the article is 9 pages long.

So there, I just missed the information. I wasn't discounting anything. I just didn't see what I was looking for. I see it now.

Bullgrit