Well yeah, driving people to quit to save money on severance from the impending layoffs is the whole point of forcing them to return to the office
You don’t like the anal probe? Just leave!!
(*without any additional pay or severance)
They should really open just an absolute shit load of individual constructive dismissal cases.
Labor boards might notice then though.
They should really keep a poster about Amazon in their offices permanently.
My guess is that by going fully onsite, they can probably avoid layoffs entirely. The majority of tech roles are hybrid or remote so the departures are going to be often and steady which will naturally select out anyone not interesting in making their life Amazon. They want employees that live and breath Amazon and this is how they get that (or just keep desperate people).
The hilarious thing is that the first ones to go will be the high performers. They’re executing a dumb as shit layoff that will set them far behind competitors.
Nah they’ll just see it as a success because the ones getting overpaid have left
So in this instance would quiet quitting lead to the desired result? Just doing the most subpar work until they’re forced to fire you with a severance…
Yes. Malicious compliance.
Oh, permission to leave the plantation, thank you boss sir.
Same old slave owner personalities.
Thanks a lot. Now, whenever I see a quote from one of these types of leadership people, I’m going to hear the quote in a southern slave owner voice like Leonardo Dicaprio in Django.
Would continue to work from home until they fire me.
Would continue to sit in office applying for other jobs until they fire me.
Any manager high up enough to be talking on a news channel doesn’t have the degree of interaction with workers to know what they think.
Source: every job I’ve ever had
As if they care what the plebes think.
As an Amazon employee…the man blatantly lied about the figures for those happy to RTO. He probably got them by seeing that ~10% of corporate staff are in the remote advocacy channel, and assumed that everyone else was…happy?
Regardless, Amazon is known as a place that values data above anything else. If you are a fresh grad PM and you’re caught fudging or misrepresenting numbers to suit a narrative, guess what happens to you. You are more than likely PIP’d or fired
I’d say that Matt Garman should be fired for lying about the data, but given that Jassy has a habit of lying about figures also, the rot is at the top.
I think people working at amazon and shopping at amazon, both without clear necessity, are part of the problem.
As someone that has worked for/with several small companies, including those involved in wellness and promoting mental health, that’s a load of shit. Lots of employers are ruthless and evil, including many of the ones people here work for. Amazon is no different, they’re just much larger.
I’ve spent most of my career working at small companies and they’ve all had fantastic work/life balance policies while also not skimping out on compensation packages. I guess you’ve just got to know how to pick 'em ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Having no tolerance for being treated like a machine rather than a human also helps.
You have exactly the attitude of someone able to work for a monster like amazon. Unnecessary aggressive and condescending.
Thanks for making my point.
1 out of every 169 people work for Amazon. Your stance is that they’re all evil.
How privileged you must be to have loads of employment options at your fingertips.
My stance is that most people have poor reading comprehension. Thanks for making my point.
I said „without necessity“. Having no other comparable options qualifies as necessity in my book.
Activism is great but the moment people shun others for not ruining themselves for the cause they become radicals.
So no, thats not my stance.
And no, I havent been born privileged in the typical western way. But I have the privilege of being pretty smart which enabled me to escape the prison of an uneducated, violent household.
And yes, I hold people accountable for not giving a shit about others. Deal with it.
People have low reading comprehension because they didn’t assume that “necessity” meant some specific thing in your head? If you want to be understood, maybe share more context.
Regardless, you sound super judgy of people whose situation you have no concept of. This tracks very well with your insistence that you care about others. People who care about others don’t need to state it. It shows in how they treat people.
And you’ve been needlessly mean in just this simple conversation. So no, you don’t care about others. You just want to project that persona.
Your comment has the hallmarks of the ignorance that the average Lemmy user has…
And more condescension. Its as if more of the same thing will do different things.
Maybe add some racism or climate denial to the mix. Just for some seasoning.
I buy on Amazon because quite frankly it’s cheaper. It used to be the case where you could look up an item on Amazon search the supplier and buy it directly many times with it cheaper than Amazon. Nowadays that’s not the case.
Principles can only go so far, there is no reason anymore for me to go through the hassle of searching for the item on amazon, searching up the merchant online to see if they have a web page(many don’t), going through the hassle of having to fill in the payment information and then also having to worry about each and every company’s return policy; when I can just order it through Amazon, usually get free shipping on the item which already saves me seven or eight dollars a purchase, and not have to worry about any of the hassle and if something goes wrong I know that more than likely Amazon will have my back during the return process.
People buy from the company because they’re able to offer a service that many other businesses do not do strictly because of their size, and unfortunately I don’t think that’s fixable
I don’t think you should be downvoted, but where I will disagree is on price. Amazon is rarely the cheaper option nowadays, and more often than not I can find the same product for the same price or cheaper elsewhere.
Where Amazon used to have the market cornered (and still do to some extent) is in logistics. Few companies can easily commit to next day delivery (let alone same day), but that’s quickly changing with companies looking to take on Amazon in this market.
From my experience Amazon is generally either on par or less the price of straight from the source, which means when you add the free shipping to it, it’s generally cheaper from my experience. It could just be me not living in a super populated state though
i can see your point. i for example did buy from amazon once so far this year. it was because the product I needed was expensive and part of a business calculation where i dont have the luxury to waste money.
however, I bought more than a hundred smaller products off of local sellers which are more expensive but i was able to afford it.
thats all I’m asking. that folks make a concious effort to prefer local sellers if they can, not some one dimensional exclusivity that will not work anyway.
It’s only cheaper for tatty knockoff garbage that breaks the first time. Real brands are the same price as anywhere else.
This was always the intention.
Break up big tech. Regulate monopolies before the cause the second great depression.
amazon unhappy with happier employees can leave too
deleted by creator
I have had multiple offers to work at AWS. I won’t because I know how shitty they treat their employees.
if they make a dude piss in a bottle shuttling boxes, imagine what they’re making higher paid engineers do. sleepless nights? impossible deadlines? insane scope creep?
no. thank you, but no.
The psychology of abuse is the worst aspect. They make their workers question their own abilities and value, while demanding higher and higher output. It’s a grinder mentality.
Amazon employees starting their own businesses in 3-2-1…
Why is even the writer of the article lying about the reason? Everyone knows this is about real estate value propping up the stock price.
Man, there are people who will argue until they are blue in the face that the purpose is not real estate.
The “only” evidence I can provide is that the values of proximal commercial properties is rapidly losing value because the workforce that provided business to those properties is no longer there. And just because the properties have investments made by the company doesn’t mean they own them outright (despite the value tying into their businesses net worth).
Of course they would lie about this. It doesn’t benefit the real estate owners and the business to publicly share that investments are losing value because of natural economics. The entire financing industry is based on lies to begin with, can’t change that now (/s).
You think Amazon is secretly massively investing in local small businesses??
No. They invest in funds that own buildings that rent to small businesses.
They need businesses to stay so they can charge them rent. The Amazon owned buildings then maintain and grow their value with inflation.
Think about inflation - who does it benefit? Only property owners.
Amazon is landlords now? I’ve never heard of any of these funds.
Not directly but any big company that has any form of corporate retirement benefit has it through private equity. I highly doubt any of it is publicly traded. But Amazon itself owns 25 buildings in the South Lake Union area of Seattle.
Amazon doesn’t do pensions or any sort of corporate retirement benefit…it’s all 401k like most US companies. Pensions are very rare here.
One Youtube channel suggested it was tax incentives. Cities give tax incentives to large corporate offices in order to bring customers, er… employees to the cities.
Work from home means offices no longer meet qualifications for tax breaks. Ergo CEO freakouts.
Don’t know if it’s true, but it does sound plausible to me.
That one sounds plausible, but I can’t imagine that property taxes are so large in Seattle that they would force their employees back. Seems like a good way to lose that tax benefit
It’ll be hilarious when their rent gets jacked up to cover empty buildings. 🤪
I’m not sure which locations they are forcing employees back to, but Amazon itself isn’t likely paying rent, they do own some buildings. That is an investment they use in their listed assets.
What’s happening is that other businesses that do rent building space aren’t getting enough revenue due to decreased traffic (think the corner coffee shop that had a steady stream of regulars every morning but now doesn’t). This causes them to leave, driving up the rent of other renters, and you get a “mortgage backed security like” crisis. Amazon doesn’t give two shits about the businesses that leave, or what they pay in rent - they care that their building value grows. Can’t do that if real estate is vacating in the nearby area.
Which to that I say: good, fuck em
Maybe the “risk takers” who invested in corporate real estate, just before corporate real estate became useless, should all fail. Idk why anyone believes the bullshit that they should be jacking up prices to cover their failures. Their whole existence is avoiding risk while calling themselves risk takers and then blaming everyone else when gambling for a living doesn’t work
Risk means sometimes shit goes south. I’ve seen a lot of shit not going south.
Credit Suisse folded, Archeagos folded. The whole Evergrande thing in Chinaa. But I think that’s it in recent history
Amazon owns like half of south lake Union: 13m sqft just in Seattle
Yeah, something stupid like 25 buildings, and they payed some stupid high price per sqft too.
Why would Amazon give a shit if real estate values go down? Amazon isn’t a real estate company.
Are you actually interested in the answer to that or just running in here to argue? I figure it’ll save me effort if you tell me before I answer.
Umm…good question. I think I came in here expecting to see some braindead takes and prepared to argue against them, but tell you what, I promise I’ll be respectful and attentive in this thread. You sound like you might actually have a good answer to my question.
Here’s another time saver. These guys will explain instead of me:
I generally don’t watch videos. I can read an article in a few seconds, I really don’t like having that stretched out to 10 minutes or more while youtubers try to hawk ads and endorsements. Thank you for the response though.
I’ve only watched the first of these, but having done so, I’m not sure I want to bother with the second. The guy in the first video repeated the (likely true) claim that WFH impacts commercial real estate value and then dunked on a couple of articles about return to work policies. But the question was, why does that sway Amazon’s thinking?
“Please leave! If we fire you, we have to pay unemployment, but your replacements will be younger (less costly health problems) and will accept less pay. It’s win-win-win for us if you leave of your own accord!”
I know two senior programmers at Amazon who found new jobs rather than RTO. Within 24 hours after they left they got emails from recruitment identifying them as “boomerang candidates”, offered them a decent raise, and offered full time remote work.
This is nothing more than getting people to quit and hiring back key personnel lost in the process.
They will do whatever they can get away with.
Melian Dialogue: “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must”
this is why collective action with 21st century employment is important. all of them could sit down. but they won’t because of humans constantly failing the prisoner’s dilemma.
