Amazon Says It Doesn’t ‘Employ’ Drivers, But Records Show It Hired Firms to Prevent Them From Unionizing::Amazon spent $14.2 million total on anti-union consulting in 2022, filings with the Department of Labor show.

  • Custoslibera@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s weirdest part, at this point the hoops Amazon has jumped through vs how profitable of a company they are - it must be cheaper for them to just let people unionise and pay them more + give better conditions?

    • SJ0@lemmy.fbxl.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do you want to pay people more because they’re better at their job or do you want to pay people more because they’ve been warming a chair longer than anyone else?

        • SJ0@lemmy.fbxl.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          Reality doesn’t care whether you care to play or not.

          There’s a limited amount of resources, you can’t hire everyone on Earth, you can’t give everyone an unlimited salary. Everything past that you’re making decisions as to who gets what.

          And by the way, if you make enough poor decisions eventually everyone loses their jobs.

          • Bartsbigbugbag@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Agreed, there’s limited resources, that’s exactly why we can’t afford to waste any more on another CEO mega yacht or private plane. We’re capable of a post-scarcity society with just the setup we have today, were we to distribute resources on need rather than greed.

          • SpacetimeMachine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            1 year ago

            There are PLENTY of resources to go around, but a teeny teeny tiny percentage of people are hogging over half of them all for themselves.

      • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Or because people need more to make a living? The whole argument of “it’s a shitty job and shouldn’t be used to support you” doesn’t really work anymore.

            • SJ0@lemmy.fbxl.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Its a very true dichotomy.

              Hey let’s hire Ashok for this position! He’s really good!

              Oops, sorry. Bob Whiteman has been here for 30 years. He’s just good enough not to fire but he has seniority so he gets first dibs on the job.

              Hey, let’s give Ashok a raise! He’s really good!

              Oops, sorry. Bob Whiteman has been here for 30 years. He’s just good enough not to fire. It he’s been here the longest so he gets paid the most.

              The false dichotomy is assuming your choices are a massive adversarial bureaucracy or not making a living wage.