Will This Change Your Mind about Amazon AU?

jackspratt on 27/02/2019 - 16:29

ABC online has done a fairly long article on what it is like to work at the Amazon "Fulfillment" warehouse in Dandenong.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-27/amazon-australia-ware…

The key points from the workers (sorry, "associates") seem to be:

  • the workplace is built around a culture of fear where their performance is timed to the second;

  • they are expected to constantly work at ‘Amazon pace’, described as somewhere between walking and jogging;

  • high-pressure targets make them feel like they can’t go to the toilet and sometimes push them to cut safety corners;

  • they can be sent home early without being paid for the rest of their shift when orders are completed; and

  • everyone is employed as a casual and constantly anxious about whether they’ll get another shift.

Amazon has responded with what to me seems to be a set of glib and reptitive boiler-plate answers to the issues raised by the ABC:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-27/amazon-australia-resp…

It has certainly given me food for thought over whether or not I would order again from Amazon.

How about you?

General Discussion

Related Stores

Amazon AU
Amazon AU
Marketplace

Comments

  • dcep on 27/02/2019 - 16:35
    +1

    Somewhere here someone mentioned only 2 local OZ working there.

    • worrierwan on 27/02/2019 - 20:03
      +24

      Na my friend works there and that's just wrong. He seems to like working for them. Keep in mind though that he is financially stable and works there just to earn a bit of pocket money

    • Orinocho on 01/03/2019 - 10:35
      +13

      As a worker at Amazon I recommend you to keep ordering there. If hardly any orders are made that means hardly any shifts for the workers are given out.

      I also don't think it is a bad place to be. I actually quite like it but you need there to be a decent amount of orders to get rostered on.

      • umoddbro on 03/03/2019 - 01:20
        +9

        Just because you said that I just ordered a box of shapes.

      • caitsith01 on 05/03/2019 - 12:07
        +3

        Not sure that reasoning makes sense. If people choose to buy from places with better employment practices then the same amount of stuff gets bought and the same amount of people get employed, only with better conditions for the workers.

        • Orinocho on 06/03/2019 - 11:54

          Ok, I'll re-explain what I was trying to say.

          There was some thought (at least by jackspratt) that whether or not purchases should be made from Amazon Australia due to some of the practices going on there as found out by the ABC report.

          One of the issues raised by workers is not getting enough shifts, or not having any certainty on them, and how many they would get if any. One of the reasons for that is due to the amount of orders being made. If there is heaps Amazon will want as many hands on deck as they can get, whilst if there is a low amount then they don't need that many people there. So to help with that issue I brought up the point of people purchasing more from there, as if less orders are made then there are less shifts available.

          You might be saying it's better to purchase elsewhere and help where there are supposed better practices, but doing that doesn't help the current Amazon workers much, as they're not at this other location.

          • [Deactivated] on 06/03/2019 - 14:40

            @Orinocho: This seems like they have the number of people required for peak workload, if everyone orders more then peak workload will go up and they will just hire more people.

  • HighAndDry on 27/02/2019 - 16:44
    +39

    Nope. Is anyone forced to work there? No? Then it seems they're willing to endure those conditions in return for the pay they're getting. There aren't any safety issues that I noticed.

    These are just warehouse workers. There are far worse jobs paying far less.

    • WreckTangle on 27/02/2019 - 17:05
      +2

      Yea i’ve worked in similar places too

    • [Deactivated] on 28/02/2019 - 17:26
      +63

      Come onnnnn. Are they being forced to work it, of course they bloody are. How do you get by without a job? Pay rent, groceries? It's impossible. Do you think they wouldn't quit and find a better job if it was so easy?

      That being said, there should be no 'bad' jobs. Minimum conditions and minimum wage means that you should be able to have any job and have it not be this bad.

        • [Deactivated] on 28/02/2019 - 18:17
          +22

          Worse pay = less ability to pay your bills. Not really sure how you're not catching that.

          • wozz on 28/02/2019 - 18:55
            +20

            @[Deactivated]: Yeah and the fact that its not always easy just to go and get another job… when i was out of work last I find things very difficult to get another one. I didn't have much experience but not everyone necessarily does..

            • Nebargains on 01/03/2019 - 08:55
              -3

              @wozz: Just because finding a job isn't necessarily easy for everyone doesn't mean they aren't working there by choice.

          • chriise on 01/03/2019 - 08:20
            -2

            @[Deactivated]: And no pay = no ability to pay your bills. Not sure how you're not catching that.

          • HighAndDry on 01/03/2019 - 09:31
            -3

            @[Deactivated]: Ok so are you giving these people jobs then? Or are you unable to do anything other than criticise? I swear, did this thread got posted on some dole bludger forum or something?

            • [Deactivated] on 01/03/2019 - 16:51
              +4

              @HighAndDry: I have a job and pay my taxes, what more am I supposed to do? I am not in any position of power in government or big business.

              The ideal solution for my mind is a Job Guarantee. Essentially a Universal Basic Income, but with work. If you want a job, you can get one. There's a billion and one things every government or council could be doing but don't have the resources. Free TAFE and mental health support, Job Guarantee, and bob's your uncle.

              • HighAndDry on 01/03/2019 - 16:56
                -7

                @[Deactivated]:

                I have a job and pay my taxes, what more am I supposed to do?

                Start a business and give these people a better job than you think Amazon is offering them. Believe me, your taxes aren't enough to pay any of these people a minimum wage. Most people's taxes don't even pay for the government benefits they already get.

                The way I see it, Amazon is doing more to help these people (giving them a job with pay) than anyone else in this thread. Whining and complaints certainly won't pay these people's rent or groceries. Amazon's paycheck will. And Amazon doesn't have an obligation to employ these people - keep that in mind. It's supposed to be mutually beneficial - Amazon gets work done, these people get paid.

                The more unreasonable requirements you place on Amazon to offer that job, the less benefits they're getting, and the faster they move to just automating the whole damn thing. They're going to do it eventually, but I'm fairly sure these people are glad to be in a job for now anyway.

                • temmanuel on 05/03/2019 - 09:35
                  +1

                  @HighAndDry: Found the libertarian.

                  Edit:Aaand we're at Venezuela already! That was quick, but not unexpected.

              • Thaal Sinestro on 05/03/2019 - 11:04

                @[Deactivated]: Creating high paying bureaucratic public service jobs (fake jobs) for anyone who wants would tank the economy, but would ensure that the ALP wins every future election. Lazy government bureaucrats all vote for the ALP. This bad idea comes from the Dimmicrats in America. Nobody would do socially useful low paying private sector jobs (like picking fruit, cutting hair, delivering goods) when they could be paid $60,000 a year for drinking coffee and surfing the net.

                Better to have universal basic income equivalent to the pension rather than highly remunerated fake pen pushing jobs like they have in the oil rich Gulf States. If people want more than a basic survival income, they have to work a real job.

                • [Deactivated] on 05/03/2019 - 18:44

                  @Thaal Sinestro: @Thaal Sinestro

                  When did I say that a Jobs Guarantee referred to high paying bureaucratic service jobs that pay $60,000 to drink coffee and surf the net?

                  That is absolutely not what I said.

                  A Jobs Guarantee would, ideally, get people out of unemployment or underemployment and into something steady that benefits them and their community. There's always plenty of lawns to be mowed, potholes to be filled. Look around your community, I guarantee you could name a million things that could be done better that there isn't time or resources to complete. They don't have to become millionaires from this type of work. Minimum wage plus benefits would do just fine.

                  It's been proven time and time again that government stimulus (such as giving a whole bunch of people purpose and money) makes the economy grow.

                  A UBI gives none of the benefits of a job other than money, which people with no increase in community engagement will pilfer away on what they are already spending their money on. A Jobs Guarantee forces people to be out in their community, talking to people, developing relationships, and doing the things humans are supposed to do to be mentally and physically well.

                  What's your problem with the above?

        • burningrage on 28/02/2019 - 19:50
          +9

          Sorry. I dont agree with HighandDry with a lot of things and am sure he or she likes to neg a lot too but to be quite frank, working anywhere is not compulsory.

          • lonewolf on 01/03/2019 - 13:54
            +4

            @burningrage: I dont always agree with HighandDry but this may be one of the few rare times i do, I dont think they are forced to work there and i dont think the pay is like the sweat shops overseas so I would say if they really dont want to work there then they should quit. Judging by the report it also sounds like a lot of new migrants or overseas workers are working there.

            Being a migrant myself I know a lot of new migrants coming from my home country to australia over the past few years and I have noticed they seem to have this whingey attitude and constantly complain about Australia and conditions even though they were dying to come here and quite a few people i personally know came via the boats.

            While the migrants from my country who came around the period i came to Australia (30) years ago came with a totally different attitude and loved being here.

            Its almost like these days people have a cerain obscure view of the kind of life they are expecting to walk into and when it isnt the dream they once thought it was going to be , they complain about it even though really they broke the law / queue jumped in the first place (only speaking about the people i know). Either that or the people who tend to queue jump or come in via irregular methods are just people with personalities that tend to complain. I dont know which it is. Some of these people are even extended families of mine.

        • Nebargains on 01/03/2019 - 08:54
          +3

          This has to be the most petty negging I've seen on ozbargain.

          No one is holding a gun to their head, if they don't want to work there they should look for another job and then leave.

          I'm not even sure what pay and conditions has to do with it, you could be on 100k pa and hate the job and conditions, but at the end of the day no one is forcing you to work there.

        • centrelink on 04/03/2019 - 22:21
          +2

          Yep I agree, I worked in a crappy job once and then realised I could not just work there anymore and so that is what I did, best decision ever.. Centrelink is the best

    • meowbert on 28/02/2019 - 19:25
      +4

      A very glib response.

      • HighAndDry on 28/02/2019 - 19:28
        -7

        It's what the OP warranted.

    • grasstown on 02/03/2019 - 13:01

      Your same comment applies to your own job

    • kasp on 02/03/2019 - 23:08
      +1

      They are just going to replace the workforce with drones the second they can get away with it. They are already doing it in some areas.

      However that said I think every country really needs to drill into the unskilled labour workforce that their time is numbered. Some really significant government programs need to happen now to prevent a catastrophe.

    • jorf on 03/03/2019 - 10:26
      +7

      I take all these articles with a grain of salt.

      I used to work at Woolies as a night captain. We regularly had 2-3000 cartons to fill, with a carton rate of 48/hour (which included the drop and end face-up, which took 12 hours by itself) - our budgets were based around that carton rate, so we only ever had enough staff hours based on the size of the night's load.

      Was it possible? Yes, but not for everyone. Plenty of people couldn't handle it. If you could handle it, it became easy after a while, and most people actually enjoyed it (including myself). Also, no need to go to the gym - I was very fit and muscly doing that every night.

      But Amazon is the only company that ever gets negative publicity like this, even though every warehouse everywhere is doing similar things and has forever.

    • Zondor on 04/03/2019 - 14:36
      +1

      I'm not really a fan of these responses. Sure it's a tough job but there's difficult and then there's unreasonable.

    • caitsith01 on 05/03/2019 - 12:10
      +2

      "Is anyone forced to work there? No? Then it seems they're willing to endure those conditions in return for the pay they're getting."

      This perspective displays an almost total lack of understanding of why we have employment laws and an industrial relations system in the first place.

      Employers have a disproportionate amount of power. Workers frequently "choose" to work somewhere because it's their least worst option, not because they have a bunch of great alternatives to select from.

      Issues like turning the whole workforce into casual employees are deliberate strategies to undermine decades of effort to protect some of the most vulnerable people in the workforce from exploitation. The goal is not 'flexibility' but to remove things like leave entitlements and protections from unfair dismissal.

      The US demonstrates what happens if you go down that road - millions of working poor with poor rates of pay and poor working conditions serving a shrinking middle class.

      We used to have an arrangement where people 'endured' whatever conditions were necessary to survive. Have a read about employment conditons in the 1700s and 1800s to see what the preferred model of employers looks like.

      • HighAndDry on 05/03/2019 - 12:12

        Apply the reverse of Hanlon's razors to my comments. I'm well aware of what I'm commenting on and the content of what my comments say. I intend to say those things. I believe in self-sufficiency - you want to run a charity, no one is stopping you. As an example:

        Employers have a disproportionate amount of power. Workers frequently "choose" to work somewhere because it's their least worst option, not because they have a bunch of great alternatives to select from.

        This applies to 99% of cases. If I didn't need an income to pay my living expenses, I wouldn't work at my current job. Some jobs can be fun and enjoyable, but that's not their primary purpose - they're a way for individuals to provide value to society in return for money. That's the nature of every job. If you can't find another way to be productive and useful to society, guess what, too bad - and again, if you want to feel sorry and subsidize people who can't or won't find a better way to contribute to society, you're free to go give them your money. Donations are tax-deductible even.

        • caitsith01 on 05/03/2019 - 12:25
          +1

          You appear to support laissez-faire capitalism, i.e., everything's fine so long as it's a market-generated outcome.

          Fortunately for most working Australians, we left that mentality behind many, many years ago in recognition that a pure capitalist approach to employment produces serious adverse consequences for employees.

          You also appear to ignore the fact that the ultimate result of what you support is something close to serfdom, i.e., an underclass of people who get paid almost nothing to perform undesirable jobs. Or perhaps you support that scenario.

          • HighAndDry on 05/03/2019 - 12:35
            -2

            @caitsith01: I support self-sufficiency.

            • I think that it's fair that you should pay your own way through life, and not live off handouts from others.

            • I think that "paying your own way" means contributing enough to society to at least balance out what you take from society, and

            • I think the value you contribute is reflected by how much money people are willing to pay you.

            Tell me what part of that is wrong.

  • [Deactivated] on 27/02/2019 - 16:53
    +2

    When I didn't like a job, I quit.

    • saltysalt on 27/02/2019 - 17:32
      +101

      Not everyone working there may have the financial stability allowing them to quit or they probably wouldn’t work there in the first place. I can’t condone bad working conditions just because they can quit. If we don’t look out for each other these corporate giants centintly won’t.

        • minklet on 28/02/2019 - 18:19
          +19

          Loads of jobs are fun

          • hadronox on 01/03/2019 - 09:28
            +1

            @minklet: not being sarcastic but please tell me some fun jobs. When i move into semi retirement i'd love to get into some. I enjoy driving so was thinking of ubering/ola but not sure of the other ones. i think forklift driving would be alright

          • [Deactivated] on 01/03/2019 - 11:56
            -1

            @minklet: Yes, but some blow and suck at the same time. My wife doesn't do these kind of jobs, I've noticed. Not any more.

        • Tech5 on 01/03/2019 - 22:54
          +2

          I feel like being unable to go toilet is a bit much though. Also the cutting corners in regards to safety part. Depends on the exaggeration.

          I understands many jobs with bad conditions get paid a lot more. E.g. miners. But there are safety work methods that must be followed or people get fired.

          • Ghost47 on 03/03/2019 - 12:06
            +1

            @Tech5: I checked out the game the other day and I did think the toilet thing was a bit too strict also. The example where you can choose to help a workmate or not (because your pick rate will be affected, and if that goes down you get less shifts) doesn't really foster a nice working environment where people are encouraged help each other either.

            That's the nature of pick and pack jobs though, sometimes you have targets you need to meet. Amazon may be more strict than other places though.

      • Dreamcast on 28/02/2019 - 20:33
        +2

        Amen brother.

      • chriise on 01/03/2019 - 08:19
        +4

        So what you're saying is… Without Amazon these people would be stuck unemployed without a way to pay their bills.

      • oztite on 04/03/2019 - 22:29
        +1

        It may be so, but if you extend that logic a bit further: workers at Amazon "warehouse" get paid more, thus all workers at equivalent "warehouse" get paid more, thus all workers slightly above "warehouse" level get paid more, and so on and so on, until everybody in the "system" gets the same degree of pay rise, let's say 100%. At this point in a free market you'd expect an inflation rate of 100% because everyone's purchase power grows by 100% and it's a competitive market. The worker will get $40 per hour instead of $20 per hour, but the dentist is now getting $400k per year instead of $200k per year, and that house you wanted to buy is now $1 million instead of $500k… How does this actually help the worker?

        I think it's more accurate to see a salary as "percentile". If you are in the bottom 10th percentile, no matter how much the pay increases, your purchase power will always maintain at the lowest 10th percentile - unless you can change the system so for example a warehouse worker is sitting on the 90th percentile, and a dentist falls to 10th percentile.

        *nothing against dentist, just an example

        • caitsith01 on 05/03/2019 - 12:15
          +2

          It's not just about pay.

          Amazon actively works to turn the whole workforce casual, which robs people of other important entitlements like leave and also robs them of the protection of unfair dismissal laws.

          We as a society have agreed on a system where if you are working somewhere in the medium/long term, you should have some degree of job security and your employer should be responsible for, e.g., supporting you when you are sick or if you have a child. We should be collectively opposed to private corporations flexing their power to try to destroy that bargain.

          Amazon is also virulently anti-union, when participation in a union is also a basic workplace right in Australia.

    • Danthemanz on 01/03/2019 - 22:50
      +3

      Apparently that's what happens in the US.
      It's just terrible that what is quite likely to become the biggest company in the world one day has taken the complete opposite direction from what the future of employment should be like.
      It's just plain sad.

      • HighAndDry on 05/03/2019 - 12:44
        -1

        Be more productive in life so that you're good for more than just picking and packing Amazon products and you won't have this problem.

  • profar on 27/02/2019 - 16:56
    +4

    Good to see great productive culture keeping prices down , making other compete to levels unforeseen in the past .

    Notice Ebay firing offers on all barrels lately , no Amazon concerns = back to good old days of Feebay .

    • caitsith01 on 05/03/2019 - 12:17
      +1

      It helps to keep prices down if you avoid having to give your staff normal workplace entitlements by keeping them all casual and living in fear of being fired if they try to improve the situation.

      Your lower prices on Amazon are partly funded by relatively vulnerable workers getting screwed by a powerful employer.

      There's no reason we couldn't have the middle ground, a competitive and modern company that creates the market pressure you're talking about but doesn't rely on abusing its workforce to do so.

      • [Deactivated] on 06/03/2019 - 14:43

        There's no reason we couldn't have the middle ground

        Well yeah there is, because people want what is cheapest. Race to the bottom and all.

  • profar on 27/02/2019 - 17:01

    Equate to no merchants getting postage back on Ebay plus items = higher prices .

    No $1 listing FVF for non stores on weekends , giving little guys a big chance of providing better prices than the giants .

  • Presence on 27/02/2019 - 17:24
    +6

    Sadly it's still much better than working in almost any hospitality or many retail jobs. At least these workers will get paid for the hours they work.

  • Seraphin7 on 27/02/2019 - 17:25
    +18

    Won't change my buying habits at all.

    If Amazon offers me the best combination of price, service, etc., they'll get my business. Might be harsh, but I don't really care about how they deliver it.

    • danyool on 28/02/2019 - 18:44
      +16

      Hmm. Slippery slope!!

    • dlakers3peat on 01/03/2019 - 02:26
      +8

      And you are sir a perfect example of what's wrong with our society. Does not care about anybody but themselves. Selfish.

      • gimme on 01/03/2019 - 07:40
        +21

        Let's just say you're right for a minute. I'd be interested to hear what YOU are actually doing to improve those conditions that makes you better than him? Other than typing on the internet. If you tell me you will never shop at Amazon then that won't make any difference. If they stop becoming a viable business in Aus because of lack of sales, they'll just shut shop. They're not going to magically improve the alleged poor conditions. People who claim the moral high ground on the internet without actually lifting a finger are dime a dozen.

        • abb on 01/03/2019 - 10:08
          +9

          If they stop becoming a viable business in Aus because of lack of sales, they'll just shut shop. They're not going to magically improve the alleged poor conditions.

          But if they shut up shop, then people are no longer being exposed to the conditions. Isn't that an improvement to overall working conditions?

          Consider the OzB favourite cage/free-range eggs topic. Sure, there are still caged chickens. But with many people avoiding buying cage eggs, there are many more free-range chickens then there used to be. This means the average quality of egg-laying chicken life has improved, no?

          Therefore, one might conclude that boycotting companies with unacceptable practices is indeed an act that can effect change.

          • Jolakot on 01/03/2019 - 11:37
            +6

            @abb: So they're now out of a job, and have to find a new one, competing with everyone else who was laid off.

            What difference is there between that, and them quitting to find better conditions?

          • gimme on 01/03/2019 - 12:29
            +1

            @abb: Don't get me started on the UNREGULATED 'cage free' business but to answer your first question, NO. People who aren't happy with the conditions can leave NOW if they wanted to. You're extreme reasoning is a bit strange. It's similar to saying if there was a major recession and everyone was out of work, the ones that had been working in poor conditions would be better off.
            Also let's face it, this is very much a first world perspective. It's not like they're bangladeshi sweatshop so I'll be taking it with a BUCKET of salt. I regularly hear about complaints at my work and 90% of the cases stems from an overinflated sense of entitlement.

            • abb on 01/03/2019 - 15:56

              @gimme: I made no claim that the individual workers would be better off unemployed, dead, or otherwise. I simply stated the statistical fact that if employers with worse-than-average conditions cease to exist, the overall average working conditions improve.

              Indeed the same outcome could be achieved by all workers refusing to take the job. There are likely to be various coercive/psychological factors at play though, real life is rarely as simple as the libertarians imagine.

              The existence of worse conditions elsewhere does not make complaints invalid. Somewhere in the world, there are children who were made to kill their own parents and join an army. That doesn't make wearing a nappy to work any more pleasant. Should we not strive for the best possible, rather than "not the worst possible" ?

              • gimme on 01/03/2019 - 16:26
                +3

                @abb: Yea but that statistical fact doesn't really add any value to the discussion. It's like saying if I cut my head off my headache will go away and if 100 people did that statistically there'll be fewer people with headaches but so what?

              • HighAndDry on 04/03/2019 - 14:48
                +1

                @abb:

                There are likely to be various coercive/psychological factors at play though, real life is rarely as simple as the libertarians imagine.

                I feel like that's a strawman of libertarians. No one says life is simple or easy - my view is that everyone lives in the same world, so you either complain about your conditions (uselessly) or you do something about it.

                So what if finding or holding a job is stressful? It's part of your responsibilities as an adult to deal with it.

                • abb on 04/03/2019 - 15:15
                  +1

                  @HighAndDry:

                  I feel like that's a strawman of libertarians.

                  I admit the possibility that I've fallen victim to Poe's law, but no, I don't think it is. There are people out there who think anyone can just quit their job if they don't like the conditions, as simple as choosing a strawberry shake instead of their usual chocolate. They're seemingly ignorant of the various financial/social/psychological pressures that make this decision very difficult to enact.

                  This excellent comic is kind-of along these lines
                  https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/the-wireless/373065/the-penci…

                  They (extreme libertarians) also think things like a system of replacing government law enforcement with a market of various policing service companies is a good way to run a society. Oh, and let's not forget the whole SOVEREIGN CITIZEN deal, which is so ridiculous it defies the bounds of my creativity in inventing a strawman to attack!

                  aside: complaining is not always useless, it helps social bonding, people sometimes offer solutions etc but I take your meaning. One action I take is to try and avoid unethical companies ;)

                  • HighAndDry on 04/03/2019 - 15:17

                    @abb: See, this is what I'm saying is strawmanning:

                    There are people out there who think anyone can just quit their job if they don't like the conditions

                    I say this, and this is true.

                    as simple as choosing a strawberry shake instead of their usual chocolate.

                    I've never said that it's simple or easy, I only point out that it's a voluntary transaction and noone's forced into taking any job.

                    They're seemingly ignorant of the various financial/social/psychological pressures that make this decision very difficult to enact.

                    I assume this is because the person needs the job/pay. Now consider Amazon didn't offer that job at all - does the person starve? No - they will do something else. Why can't they do this now?

                    Oh and re the comic? I've seen it. I hate it because it's such a pithy, emotionally charged, pander-to-those-who-like-to-blame-their-circumstances-but-never-themselves-for-anything crowd.

                    There are people who grew up in the worse situation and still were successful, so it's evidently possible. What now?

                    • abb on 04/03/2019 - 15:28
                      +1

                      @HighAndDry: I feel like you're being deliberately argumentative and uncharitable in interpreting what I've said. Slow day at work? Me too ;)

                      My initial point was that some people think it IS as easy as choosing a milkshake. (Seriously, are you familiar with those sovereign citizen nutjobs? Look them up for a laugh, then cry because one actually got elected to our senate)

                      Yes, anyone can quit. Most won't, because it's scary (not necessarily for financial reasons), they 'need' more money than the dole, etc.
                      You say it's entirely voluntary, I say there are many coercive factors at play. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

                      edit: didn't see your other bit

                      I see it as targetting those who think they alone are responsible for their good fortune.

                      There are people who grew up in the worse situation and still were successful, so it's evidently possible. What now?

                      Again, you're missing the point. It's much harder for some than others. By definition, not everyone can be in the top 1% (well, mathematically they actually can, but I don't see you arguing in favour of that kind of redistribution). I don't think "possibility" is a useful metric, the proportion of people moving up relative to their parents is a better one, and it seems to be trending down.

                      • HighAndDry on 04/03/2019 - 15:35

                        @abb:

                        I feel like you're being deliberately argumentative and uncharitable in interpreting what I've said.

                        I'd argue you started that with the strawman.

                        My initial point was that some people think it IS as easy as choosing a milkshake.

                        Okay? Those people don't matter because the argument still stands even taking into account that it's hard. That's the whole point - life is hard for everyone. And yet others seem to manage because it's your job as an adult to manage.

                        You say it's entirely voluntary, I say there are many coercive factors at play.

                        Please. Let's take the following hypothetical:

                        1. Amazon doesn't expand to Australia.
                        2. Amazon doesn't employ warehouse staff in Australia.

                        What would the person who's an Amazon warehouse worker have done instead? Why can't they take this option now?

                        • abb on 04/03/2019 - 15:51
                          +1

                          @HighAndDry:

                          What would the person who's an Amazon warehouse worker have done instead? Why can't they take this option now?

                          I cannot presume to know what they were doing in their life prior, what changes to the local labour market the warehouse has caused, the psychological changes in them caused by working there, and so on, hence it is impossible for me to answer.

                          We seem to be at odds of viewpoint which no amount of harassment will alter. My interpretation is that I prefer to look at the aggregate of what actually happens, you seem concerned with what's possible regardless of rate.

                          I see no point in either of us continuing to hit the brick wall… else perhaps I will find out what it's like to be unemployed.
                          I look forward to another thread where we may unite in tearing down some EMF-phobic or similar :)

                          • HighAndDry on 04/03/2019 - 15:55

                            @abb:

                            I cannot presume to know what they were doing in their life prior, what changes to the local labour market the warehouse has caused, the psychological changes in them caused by working there, and so on, hence it is impossible for me to answer.

                            True, but my point is that they would have managed one way or another (or become homeless). In any case, Amazon only gives them one more option - the mere existence of the Amazon job is not coercive.

                            I look forward to another thread where we may unite in tearing down some EMF-phobic or similar :)

                            Haha indeed!

        • caitsith01 on 05/03/2019 - 12:18

          If they stop becoming a viable business in Aus because of lack of sales, they'll just shut shop.

          If they can't run their business without meeting minimum workplace standards then they shouldn't be in business.

      • keejoonc on 01/03/2019 - 14:50

        too bad so sad. there are also kids dying of hunger in some parts of the world. guess what. life goes on.
        If it was animal cruelty I would have a different stance but in this case people are free to work elsewhere if they don't like it. as a consumer, I dont care as long as I get good deals and good service.

      • Thaal Sinestro on 05/03/2019 - 11:11
        +1

        What's wrong with our society isn't selfish people, but rather the system that creates selfish people: liberalism, democracy, capitalism. From the moment we are born, we are told that your worth as a person depends upon how much wealth you have. The poor in Australia are treated atrociously: remember what happened when SBC wanted to film "Struggle Street"; councils tried to shut them down.

        Liberalism, democracy, capitalism are about individualism, property rights and individual rights. There is no concept of community or collectivism. The purpose of life is to accumulate wealth, and the easiest way to do that is to expolit/manipulate/fleece other people.

    • DemocracyManifest on 27/02/2019 - 17:34
      +4

      How hard do you work? I bet not that hard to not even be guaranteed a job the next day

      • Trying2SaveABuck on 27/02/2019 - 22:09
        +26

        Eh like it or not the fact is most jobs that can be shipped overseas are being shipped overseas because wages are high in Australia especially for low skilled work and tradesmen work.

        How many countries in the world do bricklayers make the same as Doctors and miners get paid more then Laywers? People that hold the slow and stop sign make more then most engineers…

        Local manufacturing is dead because of it take away our resources and all we really have is agriculture which we are selling to foreign investors anyway

        I applaud any company trying to hire Australians because most of the Australian companies do not Telstra, Qantas etc have shipped all non-essential personal overseas as for foreign companies ford, Holden, Toyota, SPC are all moving(ed) etc out of Australia in its entirety.

        • Thaal Sinestro on 05/03/2019 - 11:20

          Governments tell kids to study STEM, but STEM subjects are hard. Why bother when you can make more money from a trade, a non-science degree (especially commerce), a wharfie, a road crew job. Once Australia runs out of minerals we will disintegrate into a 3rd world backwater; we will have nothing to trade for all of the tech and manufactured items we are addicted to.

    • saltysalt on 27/02/2019 - 17:35
      -5

      Not true. What other countries are you comparing us to? One of the reasons wages are somewhat high is because productivity is high.

      • HighAndDry on 27/02/2019 - 17:50
        +1

        But is productivity high because the workers are more efficient or because companies are investing more in tech and automation?

      • [Deactivated] on 28/02/2019 - 17:28
        +6

        If an Australian's productivity is high why are Australian's worried about foreigners coming to take their jobs for lower wages?

        • Bargain80 on 01/03/2019 - 15:45

          I can't say about productivity, but some (or most) public company only care about driving tangible factor such as driving cost down.
          If they have to hire two or three offshore workers but can pay salary less than one Australian worker, they will.
          They don't really care about the Quality of the work because they can't show it to the shareholders.

          I've been in that situation where half of my team were outsourced to offshore. During handover, it's apparent that their skill and knowledge are very poor.
          But of course shareholders are happy because the company can reduce cost and reduce head count. it's called capitalism.

          • [Deactivated] on 02/03/2019 - 12:19
            -1

            @Bargain80: Thats a good point.

            If quality of work going down leads to lower profit, management will have to rehire staff that produce better quality of work.

            If it does not impact profit. Turns out quality of work doesn't matter to the consumers after all.

    • Fudnut on 28/02/2019 - 08:36
      +1

      Agree, waiting for you to take the lead and take a pay cut + increase your productivity. Keep us all updated once you've done so…

      • Trying2SaveABuck on 28/02/2019 - 09:06
        +2

        Good comment man did you have to pass year 8 to think of it?

        If you learn to read issue of high wages and low productivity wont be resolved by just working harder or taking a pay cut but a change in attitude. Between a wage, super AL, sick leave, public holidays and redundancies Australians are sum of the least employable people in the world.

        A large part of it is because we are OVER TAXED in the middle class thus wages need to be hire to survive a cost high tax and high cost of living issue.

        too many people dont realise the low productivity and high wages is a actually a symptom not the cause of a lot of our issues. In other parts of the world individual make 700-1200 Euros/Pounds/Dollars a month and live comfortabily in Australia if you are basically not earning over 100k a house hold you are borderline poverty

        • Baniya on 28/02/2019 - 14:10
          +5

          Seems to me, that one of the solutions is for Australia is to aggressively pursue reaping the taxes owed by huge corporations. Recover and then seal the loop holes.

          • abuch47 on 01/03/2019 - 06:49
            +1

            @Baniya: Biggest issue is we are an emerging island that needs global corps to stay. If we tax them too hard they go. Its a paradox as we definitely need them here and we definitely need them to pay their taxes.

    • burningrage on 28/02/2019 - 19:51
      +3

      The biggest issue in Australia is wages are high and productivity is low

      Hear hear!

      • Trying2SaveABuck on 28/02/2019 - 20:25

        Lower taxes results in lower cost of living, increased productivity and the acceptance for lower wages

        the fact is it is the governments fault Australia isnt a competitive nation for business and investment

        We have some of the highest taxes in the world with a government that mismanages money like it grows on tress

    • MementoMori on 01/03/2019 - 10:35

      Don't you mean to say that the most awesome thing about Australia, that those before us handed down to us, is a country where the average person only has to work at a moderately stressful/hard job and have an awesome quality of life?

      I'm talking about people who work in call centers and can afford a yearly overseas trip to SEA or NZ. Unheard of in the rest of the world (for the most part).

      This is something worth protecting. Don't be willing to give this up for the sake for $5 off a packet of Eneloops.

      • Trying2SaveABuck on 01/03/2019 - 13:23

        Our country is awesome because of past generation not the current one - dont ever forget that

        • MementoMori on 05/03/2019 - 14:32

          I mentioned this, yeah?

          "that those before us handed down to us"

    • kasp on 02/03/2019 - 23:14
      +1

      I call bullshit on that. My company they look at Australia's output as being insane compared to the rest of the globe even when they consider payrates. Well in my area anyway.

      We are a very small team who take on more huge projects and have bigger successes than anywhere else in the globe. The fact is when you pay peanuts you get monkeys.

      • Trying2SaveABuck on 02/03/2019 - 23:16

        Of course there a exceptions to every rule - the question it are you the exception or are you the rule?

        I think in highly highly skill fields you got to pay the big money to get results but stacking boxes at the Amazon wear house probably doesnt fall into that category…

    • Thaal Sinestro on 05/03/2019 - 11:15
      +1

      Aldi is another company that tries to minimize prices for consumers by maximizing worker productivity.

      • Trying2SaveABuck on 05/03/2019 - 14:34

        Aldi pays there staff about 15% more p/h then coles/Woolworths does… they also sell Alcohol thus cannot have staff under 18 years old not ripping off teenagers paying them peanuts

  • JIMB0 on 27/02/2019 - 17:40
    +40

    You most likely posted this thread using a device made in a factory where the working conditions are far worse than at Amazon Australia.

    • saltysalt on 27/02/2019 - 17:50
      +14

      And… it’s not like it’s a race to the bottom.

    • Caped Baldy on 28/02/2019 - 18:28
      +7

      We're all going to the bad place.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join