Deadly Collapse at Amazon Warehouse Raises Questions About Its Cellphone Ban (msn.com) 180
At least six people were killed Friday night when an Amazon warehouse was struck by a tornado, causing part of the building to collapse.
Bloomberg reports that the incident "amplified concerns" about a warehouse policy that Amazon has been re-implementing for its workers: banning cellphones. Amazon had for years prohibited workers from carrying their phones on warehouse floors, requiring them to leave them in vehicles or employee lockers before passing through security checks that include metal detectors. The company backed off during the pandemic, but has been gradually reintroducing it at facilities around the country.
Five Amazon employees, including two who work across the street from the building that collapsed, said they want access to information such as updates on potentially deadly weather events through their smartphones — without interference from Amazon. The phones can also help them communicate with emergency responders or loved ones if they are trapped, they said. "After these deaths, there is no way in hell I am relying on Amazon to keep me safe," said one worker from a neighboring Amazon facility in Illinois. "If they institute the no cell phone policy, I am resigning."
Another worker from an Amazon warehouse in Indiana said she is using up her paid time off whenever the company decides to remain open despite warnings of extreme weather events. Having her phone with her is critical to making those decisions, especially about sudden tornado risks, she said. "I don't trust them with my safety to be quite frank," she said. "If there's severe weather on the way, I think I should be able to make my own decision about safety..."
The National Weather Service puts out extreme weather alerts via text messages, letting the public know in advance about dangerous conditions... Tornadoes are trickier to anticipate than hurricanes and snowstorms, but the weather service still issues warnings to those in their path. The weather service sent such a warning at about 8 p.m. local time Friday, about 30 minutes before the storm collapsed the Edwardsville Amazon delivery station, the workers said.
The Daily Beast tells the story of young Navy veteran named Clayton Cope who started working at the Amazon fulfillment center earlier this year: After an alert was issued Friday night about a deadly tornado approaching Illinois, Carla Cope told her son "to get to shelter" at the Amazon delivery facility where he was working.
Instead, she told The Daily Beast her 29-year-old son, Clayton, insisted he needed to alert others about the impending natural disaster. "He just said he needed to tell someone that [the tornado] was coming," Cope told The Daily Beast on Saturday, hours after she learned her son was among six people killed in Edwardsville, Illinois, when storms ripped through.
Two more Amazon warehouse workers died in 2018 when another building partially collapsed in a tornado in Balitmore.
Bloomberg reports today that Amazon "declined to address the concerns raised by workers about its mobile phone policy, saying its focus now is 'on assisting the brave first responders on the scene and supporting our affected employees and partners in the area.'"
Bloomberg reports that the incident "amplified concerns" about a warehouse policy that Amazon has been re-implementing for its workers: banning cellphones. Amazon had for years prohibited workers from carrying their phones on warehouse floors, requiring them to leave them in vehicles or employee lockers before passing through security checks that include metal detectors. The company backed off during the pandemic, but has been gradually reintroducing it at facilities around the country.
Five Amazon employees, including two who work across the street from the building that collapsed, said they want access to information such as updates on potentially deadly weather events through their smartphones — without interference from Amazon. The phones can also help them communicate with emergency responders or loved ones if they are trapped, they said. "After these deaths, there is no way in hell I am relying on Amazon to keep me safe," said one worker from a neighboring Amazon facility in Illinois. "If they institute the no cell phone policy, I am resigning."
Another worker from an Amazon warehouse in Indiana said she is using up her paid time off whenever the company decides to remain open despite warnings of extreme weather events. Having her phone with her is critical to making those decisions, especially about sudden tornado risks, she said. "I don't trust them with my safety to be quite frank," she said. "If there's severe weather on the way, I think I should be able to make my own decision about safety..."
The National Weather Service puts out extreme weather alerts via text messages, letting the public know in advance about dangerous conditions... Tornadoes are trickier to anticipate than hurricanes and snowstorms, but the weather service still issues warnings to those in their path. The weather service sent such a warning at about 8 p.m. local time Friday, about 30 minutes before the storm collapsed the Edwardsville Amazon delivery station, the workers said.
The Daily Beast tells the story of young Navy veteran named Clayton Cope who started working at the Amazon fulfillment center earlier this year: After an alert was issued Friday night about a deadly tornado approaching Illinois, Carla Cope told her son "to get to shelter" at the Amazon delivery facility where he was working.
Instead, she told The Daily Beast her 29-year-old son, Clayton, insisted he needed to alert others about the impending natural disaster. "He just said he needed to tell someone that [the tornado] was coming," Cope told The Daily Beast on Saturday, hours after she learned her son was among six people killed in Edwardsville, Illinois, when storms ripped through.
Two more Amazon warehouse workers died in 2018 when another building partially collapsed in a tornado in Balitmore.
Bloomberg reports today that Amazon "declined to address the concerns raised by workers about its mobile phone policy, saying its focus now is 'on assisting the brave first responders on the scene and supporting our affected employees and partners in the area.'"
This is why you need unions (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This is why you need unions (Score:5, Insightful)
If we weren't a feckless society of corporate sycophants we'd hold companies liable for civil damages and criminal penalties when people are hurt or killed due to negligence and poorly conceived draconian company policies.
Re: (Score:2)
>"If we weren't a feckless society of corporate sycophants we'd hold companies liable for civil damages and criminal penalties when people are hurt or killed due to negligence and poorly conceived draconian company policies."
What are you going on about?
Companies are successfully sued all the time for civil damages. In fact, perhaps TOO often.
And, sometimes, criminal too. Sometimes aimed at the corporation, sometimes it's executives. This is a federal guideline, of which States have something similar:
"
Re: (Score:2)
If we weren't a feckless society of corporate sycophants we'd hold companies liable for civil damages and criminal penalties when people are hurt or killed due to negligence and poorly conceived draconian company policies.
A couple questions - what would your reaction be if this was a secure facility where cell phones are not allowed?
Second - explain how a tornado hitting a warehouse is Amazon's fault.
If a company is going to be responsible for Acts of God, then perhaps all of the employees should be forced to wear GPS tracking units.
We had a case near here some years ago where in a local mountain pass with an interstate running through it, a pop-up snow squall happened.
A huge pileup occurred, several people were
Re: (Score:2)
If cell phones are not allowed the the company needs to make sure that phones are available when needed. Supervisors could have them, or they could provide landlines for emergency use. Even just put a cell phone in the first aid kit, along with a charger.
Re:This is why you need unions (Score:4, Interesting)
If cell phones are not allowed the the company needs to make sure that phones are available when needed. Supervisors could have them, or they could provide landlines for emergency use. Even just put a cell phone in the first aid kit, along with a charger.
Sounds quite reasonable. And they may have, because we're getting just part of the whole story here. A simple flip-phone would work great. There is another part of the story though. There is enough smartphone addiction going around that some folks will use any excuse to have them 24/7.
My concern is that if an Amazon warehouse is like any other I've been around, it's a fast paced, noisy and potentially dangerous environment. Several forklifts, conveyors and people moving about with various tasks - it's just not a place to get distracted. For all the good things they bring us, smartphones have an amazing ability to destroy situational awareness.
I mean that if some people were killed by smartphone distraction in Amazon warehouses there would probably be a hue and cry holding Amazon liable because they allowed smartphones.
This could be a meeting of modern sensibilities where someone has to be held liable, along with the popular Amazon hatred. Because if they did allow smartphones, and the tornado came through, destroyed the warehouse, and knocked out the Cell towers, is Verizon or the tower manufacturer now liable?I mean with a premise that employees must have their smartphones to avoid company liability, does it not follow that the phone service must be available to avoid carrier liability in the same instance?
All this sounds like an excellent impetus to fully automate the Amazon Warehouses. If you are put in a damned if you do/damned if you don't situation, and automation eliminated the situation, it's a good argument for that automation.
Re: (Score:2)
There is enough smartphone addiction going around that some folks will use any excuse to have them 24/7.
You are replying to one of them. He is mentally ill in other ways too, particularly in that he cut a meaningful part of his body off.
The fucker you are replying to also wants to have control of your children. Facts.
Re: (Score:2)
There is enough smartphone addiction going around that some folks will use any excuse to have them 24/7.
You are replying to one of them. He is mentally ill in other ways too, particularly in that he cut a meaningful part of his body off.
I certainly don't agree with everything Amimojo writes, but I don't see mental illness anywhere in the mix.
The factors that might lead to a heavy duty decision like going transgender are interesting, but who s/he wishes to engage in sex as what with are outside the scope of this particular discussion. I have more of a Barry Goldwater outlook on such matters.
Re: (Score:2)
explain how a tornado hitting a warehouse is Amazon's fault.
I don't think any reasonable person would, nor should, say the tornado hitting is Amazon's fault in the slightest - but I think if they didn't do something like have a means of hooking up a public PA system to a NOAA radio feed or something (which should be easy to do IMO since that stuff is easily accessible online these days, without the need of a NOAA radio), or some other means of quickly warning people, IMO it'd be reasonable to blame them for not giving them ample warning.
Re: (Score:2)
explain how a tornado hitting a warehouse is Amazon's fault.
I don't think any reasonable person would, nor should, say the tornado hitting is Amazon's fault in the slightest - but I think if they didn't do something like have a means of hooking up a public PA system to a NOAA radio feed or something (which should be easy to do IMO since that stuff is easily accessible online these days, without the need of a NOAA radio), or some other means of quickly warning people, IMO it'd be reasonable to blame them for not giving them ample warning.
Certainly if they didn't allow weather alerts or any way of allowing people to know say, that the building is on fire - that would not only be liability, but criminal in nature. My main thought is that whenever there is a crisis - altogether too many people go looking for someone to blame. And since by and large, people hate Jeff Bezos, it's only natural that his company would be blamed. It's an emotional reaction, not a rational one.
Re: (Score:2)
So you haven't read any of the news articles about what happened? So you didn't know about their response?
And you clearly don't have a NOAA alert radio turned on. That system gives warnings for everything. It would be causing accidents by distracting people when it went off.
Instead, tornado alerts are issued by the local weather forecast office, and the managers subscribe to those alerts, generally via text message. And Amazon did receive the alert, and did tell workers to take cover. However, just as in a
Unions organized workers in the voting blocks (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Alternatively, the policy is a case of infantilizing the workforce.
These rules are not arbitrary (Score:4, Interesting)
Alternatively, the policy is a case of infantilizing the workforce.
Having worked in a warehouse, such rules are actually necessary. Many rules are actually based on patterns of accidents that used to happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Some rules are a permutation of the "Survivorship Bias" theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
You try to fix one problem, but it's actually another problem that has to be fixed.
Re: (Score:2)
I have to wonder if a ban on having the cellphone in use other than on break (and certainly never in any hazard area) would do the job. Make it a firing offense. It would be a fort of M&M test to weed out unsafe workers at that point. Or even define a hazard area (basically wherever the forklifts run).
Re: (Score:2)
a fort of M&M test
A what?
Re: (Score:2)
That would be s/fort/sort/, of course.
As the legend goes, when Van Halen was touring, the contracts specified that there would be a bowl of M
This wasn't some sort of prima donna crap, it was a test. If the concert promoter didn't bother to fulfill M&M clause, what are the odds they actually made sure the floor could take the specified load and the wiring had the specified capacity?
So, if a forklift operator can't keep the cell in his pocket even knowing it's a firing offense, what are the odds he is a
Re:These rules are not arbitrary (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, it's true. Cellphones are dangerous in the warehouse - distractions and all that.
But that doesn't mean we're completely helpless - there are many options to providing the emergency notifications and communications that are far safer to use.
First, have phones available at regular intervals. Regular wired phones that are attached to the shelves and at the end caps so if you need to get to a phone, they are readily available and in well known locations easy to get to.
Second, everyone should be provided a radio. You know, a regular VHF radio. When they clock in, they get the radio, when they clock out, they return the radio and it's put on charge. The radio provides for instant communications as well as communications in an emergency. Central dispatch can provide weather information. Many commercial radios provide standby channel facilities where a broadcast can be made to unmote and unsquelch all radios even if they are on a different channel.
The problem? It costs money. Wiring phones at regular intervals costs a ton in infrastructure (having to drop network cabling for VoIP phones), and radios aren't cheap (they're still around $1000 because well, Motorola, plus a base station set, likely an external antenna repeater to get people outside the building, plus all the associated battery charger banks and such). Oh yeah, and the FCC requires an annual payment for licensing (they are commercial band radios). Plus, someone to man the central dispatch station so they can make the call to 911 if need be.
But any workplace dangerous enough where you can't allow cellphone use already does things like this because well, emergencies.
Many warehouses already have voice activated computers each person uses, so it isn't exactly a huge stretch to even add voice communications to that.
Re: (Score:2)
First, have phones available at regular intervals. Regular wired phones that are attached to the shelves and at the end caps so if you need to get to a phone, they are readily available and in well known locations easy to get to.
Wired phones are expensive enough, but hardening such a system against possible disasters would be exorbitant. It's far easier just to allow cellphones. You could require that they be turned off while on the job.
Re: (Score:2)
Then have a halfway policy - supervisors can have cellphones, but are not allowed to look at them while on the job unless it's an emergency.
Re: (Score:2)
Then have a halfway policy - supervisors can have cellphones, but are not allowed to look at them while on the job unless it's an emergency.
To repeat what I posted elsewhere. You can carry but if you are looking at a smartphone on the warehouse floor you get written up for a safety violation. Step off the floor to check, like a quick visit to restroom or getting a drink of water. During bad weather the manager can check when in his/her office and update everyone over the PA.
FWIW my manager's office was in the middle of the warehouse floor. We could step inside at any time, checking a smartphone would be OK in there too.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say that it's the opposite - a phone would allow anyone to call emergency services in the event of an accident and maybe save lives. Every second counts if there's an accident.
I work in an industry area where we have regulations where we shall have communication equipment available and some places only have phone coverage.
There might be a few brick-brains that uses the phones at the wrong moment, but that's another issue.
Re:This is why you need unions (Score:5, Interesting)
I'd say that it's the opposite - a phone would allow anyone to call emergency services in the event of an accident and maybe save lives. Every second counts if there's an accident.
I work in an industry area where we have regulations where we shall have communication equipment available and some places only have phone coverage.
There might be a few brick-brains that uses the phones at the wrong moment, but that's another issue.
There's a difference between a requirement that people must have a communication device, which makes sense, and allowing them to have cellphones. Police radios for drivers in cars, where cellphone use is banned, have a simple push to talk communication method. There's exactly one button that you don't need to look at. If there's a problem with someone not being able to communicate after this accident then the problem is lack of redundancy and safety planning in the system Amazon provided, not the fact that the people didn't have a cellphone.
Amazon should definitely be liable for this failure. They didn't protect their workforce. The workforce should definitely have access to emergency communications and to safety warnings about things like tornadoes. That doesn't mean that cellphones are the right way to solve the problem. They are just one idea, and from the comments from people who worked in warehouses, a bad one.
Re: (Score:3)
I'd say that it's the opposite - a phone would allow anyone to call emergency services in the event of an accident and maybe save lives. Every second counts if there's an accident.
Reminds me of an early study on Texting While Driving. The conclusion was two things 1. TWD causes accidents. 2. The device that was involved in the TWD accident was handy to have to report the accident.
The problem with the smartphone is that yes, it can call 911 in an instant. But it can also be the proximate cause of the need to call 911.
When the addictive little things came out, in my college town, students were getting killed walking into traffic while using their phones,
So I guess they could get
Re: (Score:2)
The idea that Amazon is responsible for Acts of God and that the inability for everyone to contact 911 at any time is a right, does it follow that we must force Verizon et al to provide 100 percent coverage?
Also - what if the Tornado took out the warehouse, and the workers all had phones, but the tornado also took out the cell coverage in the area - is Verizon et al now responsible and liable?
A Verizon tower being taken out is not Verizon's fault. Amazon taking away cell phones is intentional. By removing cell phones, they removed one way workers can protect themselves from danger. They need to provide something else to make up for it.
Imagine if Amazon chained their workers to their work stations. When a fire occurs, I think it would 100% be Amazon's fault if those workers died at their stations due to not being able to run away.
OH, I wish that was the case. (Score:2)
The penalty for this, for a corporation, should be a fine that is a large percentage of their market capitalization. After all, if a person did this, they would be put in jail for years, and financially ruined.
Re: (Score:2)
Here, Amazon is guilty of several counts of manslaughter, because the did not make sure that all staff were in a tornado shelter as soon as the warning was issued.
The news says they did order workers to their designated shelter as soon as they received the tornado warning.
On the one hand, you're making an appeal to strict enforcement of the law. On the other hand, you're assigning conclusions of guilt without even a cursory examination of the facts.
You're a dangerous nutcase.
Re: This is why you need unions (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
companies are regularly held to account for liable and civil damages due to negligence
That depends on one's definition of "held to account". If the "holding to account" is, let's say, a) $1 million per death, a company the size of Amazon will shrug it off as a rounding error. If, on the reverse, it's b) a full week of the entire, raw, global, before-taxes revenue (not profit, revenue) of the entire portfolio of companies the dead worked for, whether as a direct employee, or as an employee of a contractor, per death, plus criminal prosecution of the entire chain of command all the way up to t
Re: (Score:2)
Ban cell phone use on warehouse floor (Score:5, Insightful)
In order to prevent the 1 in a million disaster accident you will end up with daily accidents from people staring at the cell phones when they should have been watching the heavy equipment moving around.
You can still ban the use of cellphones on the warehouse floor. Want to check the weather, leave the floor.
It was not Amazon but I worked in a warehouse part time during high school and early college. All you have to do is say anyone looking at a cellphone on the floor will be written up for a safety violation.
Re: (Score:2)
Then you're also going to have to give workers time to leave the floor and check their phones, rn Amazon isn't giving people time to take a piss
Re: (Score:2)
Then you're also going to have to give workers time to leave the floor and check their phones, rn Amazon isn't giving people time to take a piss
Again, my warehouse was not Amazon but our bathrooms and break room and water fountain were just off the floor. We could step off the floor for a quick visit if needed. It was encouraged to take that big leisurely dump during break, but if the need arose we were not forced to hold it.
My manager's office was in the middle of the floor. We could step inside at any time. If smartphones had existed at the time anyone with a half decent reason would be allowed to step in and give it a quick check.
Re: (Score:2)
And yet, here we are
No lawsuits. (Score:4, Insightful)
That's what worker's comp is all about.
Now what I can't evaluate, not being a lawyer, is whether Amazon's conduct amounted to "reckless disregard for human life", and whether they could just throw a manager under the bus and get away with it.
Here's a paper about how hard it is to enforce the law against killer corporations:
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virt... [ojp.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Worldwide, lawsuits do not force employers to improve health and safety. Unions do.
Not in Europe. Unions have nothing to say in regards of health and safety, that is done by law. Unions negotiate working conditions, as in times, vacations, payment etc.
No (Score:2, Insightful)
No. This is why you need worker protection laws with teeth. Unions don't arm employees or protect them. They empower unions with very many of them not really in worker interests.
That said this is the USA we're talking about so the idea of having regulations for worker protection is laughable, so unions are about the only thing you can have when your government is bought and paid for by capitalism.
Re:No (Score:5, Informative)
The history of unions is very country specific. In the US, there have been definite problems with corruption and so on in some places.
In places like Germany and Finland, the unions have had great influence over law and safety. They represent an alternative hierarchy outside the company management so they hear about the truth of what is happening at the shop-floor. The union leaders don't have the pressure to conform and lie which comes to the company managers. They then gather that information together and see real problems. Sometimes that simply means talking to the senior management and getting problems solved. Sometimes that means working with governments and political movements and getting laws fixed. Often in these countries the unions belong to "works councils" and actually work for the long term future of their own company, possibly even more than the management (since they expect to stay working in a company longer). This can be a great system.
The UK also has a problematic history with unions like the US. I don't think this is a coincidence - employers have tried to fix up laws like in the US which allow them to ignore unions. Also the unions themselves often seem to be more into confrontation than discussion. Our unions actually blocked laws to set up works councils like in Germany. I really think both the US and UK should think about handling this more like Germany, at least in more stable more long term investing companies. Union involvement in law really makes sense then.
Re: (Score:3)
>"The history of unions is very country specific. In the US, there have been definite problems with corruption and so on in some places."
And it is very State specific also. There is far less union corruption in "right to work" States, when unions cannot force employees to pay for union membership.
>"The UK also has a problematic history with unions like the US. I don't think this is a coincidence - employers have tried to fix up laws like in the US which allow them to ignore unions."
That depends on yo
Re: (Score:2)
In places like Germany and Finland, the unions have had great influence over law and safety.
And that's the thing isn't it. The unions aren't there to argue with the employer, they work with the government to pass laws and regulations. In a typical workplace the Workers Councils exist to call out the company when they don't follow the government regulations.
I like the hilarious examples of one of our plants in the USA. They had a union strike and everyone walked off the job. Engineers took over, they ran the plant they walked around in the field turning valves, taking pumps in and out of service, d
Re:This is why you need unions (Score:5, Insightful)
But ultimately, this is a product of weak laws and Amazon playing off states against each other in a race to the bottom. Nothing will change because one of their warehouses is flattened. Maybe Amazon will be found in some violation of some law regarding building codes, or tornado warnings / shelter and receive a slap on the wrist. But that'll be all.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a requirement for Union or otherwise.
Change the laws, so that any death or injury due to the company and they have to pay a fine + damages which is a % of the revenue of the company in that country (or world wide).
And have a minimum sum as well, in the million range, so even the very small companies will feel the pain from such incidents, and giants, like Amazon, where millions are pocket change / cost of doing business will start looking into such things cos a % of revenue can run into multiple bi
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent up. Should have been FP, too. (Well, actually anything would have been better as FP than one of those brain farts.)
Re: (Score:2)
Cadillac liberals
Vapid insult politics are the best.
Re: (Score:3)
Hmm (Score:3)
Nah, everyone will just call them lazy whiners for not wanting to die for their obscenely low wages.
Re: (Score:3)
Nah, it's almost as if Amazon should be subject to strong government regulation that ensure a safe workplace and provides for the health and well being of workers.
But that's not compatible with the American government (This message brought to you by corporate America. We'll buy the government for you!).
Metal Detector? (Score:2)
If you need to let your employees go through a metal detector before entering their workplace, you may be treating them as hostiles, and maybe you should be rethinking your policies.
They let me bring a switchblade to work ... (Score:2)
If you need to let your employees go through a metal detector before entering their workplace, you may be treating them as hostiles, and maybe you should be rethinking your policies.
LOL - When I worked in a warehouse, not Amazon, we would come to work "armed". :-) We had our own knives. It was more efficient to bring your own than find one of the shared ones for opening boxes, cutting straps, etc. This sort of thing is one of the reasons why a switchblade with a blade less than 2 inches is legal in various US states. Its considered a tool at that point.
Re: (Score:2)
Quote: "If you need to let your employees go through a metal detector before entering their workplace, you may be treating them as hostiles, ..."
LOL Then, in the USA, STUDENTS are HOSTILES XD
Re: (Score:2)
In the real world most plebs are stupid and many are violent.
Docile techies are a tiny minority who forget we're a tiny minority because of our media presence.
Of course metal detectors are used. Workplace violence is common and lower class workers are inherently drawn from undesirable populations who are not just violent but prone to sexual harassment and other degeneracy.
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon doesn't have metal detectors to prevent workplace violence. They're there to prevent people from stealing stuff from the warehouse.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, and while most employees I am sure are trustworthy, there are just enough who would take advantage to make this a reasonable policy.
But if they take your cell phone, you expect them to have their own tornado warning system in place, given that warehouses are notorious unstable in adverse weather. Why did they not warn the employees?
Re: (Score:2)
In the real world most plebs are stupid and many are violent.
In the real world most of our so-called leaders are stupid and many are violent by proxy. Fuck yo bullshit characterization.
Docile techies are a tiny minority who forget we're a tiny minority because of our media presence.
Docile? Fuck around and find out.
They're responsible. (Score:5, Interesting)
In this case, Amazon stripped people of their ability to have cell phones which are universally considered essential communication devices, while at the same time failing to provide adequate weather warnings that doom was incoming. So Amazon, I have to side with these employees.
Re:They're responsible. (Score:5, Insightful)
>"In this case, Amazon forbid access to what is ultimately a safety tool. "
I would hazard to guess that for many on the "floor", many of whom will not be able to resist constantly looking at their phones, having the phones poses far more safety hazards than not having them. How often is there a disaster that also knocks out land lines (that also doesn't take out the towers?)
>"If your organization deliberately strips you of rights"
Having a cell phone at work is not a "right."
>"Amazon stripped people of their ability to have cell phones which are universally considered essential communication devices"
The reality is, very few people need to be in instant outside-of-work contact when at work. In all but the most extremely unusual cases, they have land-line phones. Last week, in new employee orientation where I work, an employee's daughter was in an accident. The hospital called our main desk and we went to the employee in less than a minute to inform her and pull her out of orientation.
>"In this vein, it's similar to companies forbidding weapons"
Not really, because a concealed weapon (with permit, of course) isn't a constant distraction for a huge number of workers. It doesn't nag you, it can't be used to play games, chat, read the news, check the weather, send photos, etc. It is as distracting as carrying a wallet.
>"failing to provide adequate weather warnings that doom was incoming"
Now that is something that should certainly be addressed. Where I work, there is a weather alert radio at the front desk, and we have a PA code for such things (weather, fire, medical, security, etc).
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
How often is there a disaster that also knocks out land lines (that also doesn't take out the towers?)
The landline on the other side of the rubble isn't going to help you contact anyone from under the rubble. Your cell phone will be on you and reachable.
Re: (Score:2)
If the landline is broken down, the cell phone network will most likely be broken down, too.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:They're responsible. (Score:4, Insightful)
>"The landline on the other side of the rubble isn't going to help you contact anyone from under the rubble. Your cell phone will be on you and reachable."
If the tower works. If you are conscious. If you can get to the phone. If the phone isn't damaged also. If the signal can penetrate. There are lots of possibilities, yet. Nothing is for certain.
Management can monitor weather and update via PA (Score:5, Interesting)
In this vein, it's similar to companies forbidding weapons (in states where people can legally carry one.)
Interestingly, I brought knives to the warehouse I worked in during high school and early college days. Not Amazon. Most of the time I had a folding Buck 110 that I had for fishing and camping. At one point, kind of as a novelty, I got a switchblade (blades under 2 inches were legal). Most of my coworkers had a personal knife too. It was more convenient than the company shared knives.
In this case, Amazon stripped people of their ability to have cell phones which are universally considered essential communication devices, ...
On the warehouse floor cellphones are a safety hazard. Anyone looking at one should be written up for a safety violation. You can check the weather off the floor. We had a break room and bathrooms next to our floor. You were allowed to get a drink of water or go to the bathroom at any time if you needed to. I'm sure a quick check of the weather when severe weather warnings were active would have been OK. Actually the warehouse manager had a little office in the center of the floor, our managers would have probably had their own cell phones on their desk and kept us updated as necessary over the PA system.
Re:They're responsible. (Score:5, Insightful)
Amazon forbid access to what is ultimately a safety tool. Maybe someone could have called 911 when the wall fell and saved a life or something?
No. A mobile phone is not a safety tool in a workplace. Amazon didn't provide necessary safety tools nor manage the safety of employees, that we can agree on, but the single worst thing you can do in an emergency is call 911 from your mobile. That is a great recipe for emergency responders showing up in the wrong place, or getting into an argument with security.
The company should be held responsible for the safety of the employees and that includes providing security and emergency services, directing emergency services in an efficient manner, and providing communication.
Why should an employee in a warehouse need a cellphone to get storm updates? Are there no intercoms? communication systems? This is Amazon, why can't they buy TVs from themselves and put them up on the wall with live info?
Why should an employee need to call 911? Don't they have company phones? Aren't security aware where employees are in the building? Is there no competent mustering / tornado warning system?
So many questions here about Amazons failures, none of which are resolved by giving employees mobile phones and getting them to make their own decisions. That is a recipe for disaster.
Re: (Score:2)
True, but this is the US where people have to feel in control even if they aren't. They don't call the area tornado alley* for nothing.
*Which BTW has moved further east over the years.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly, this is the core of the problem. They did not have proper risk mitigation in place, and they should pay for it.
Re: (Score:3)
Only in America someone would equate bringing a cell phone to work with bringing guns to work.
"Act of God" (Score:2)
Some things are/were labeled an "Act of God" situation. Not literally (except for some,) but that class of problem where it's an Act of Nature or random chaos beyond reasonable control.
We are not a reasonable society anymore. We think "never again" and demand it against reality and even if we don't actually think that naively, we vote/support people who SPEAK naively to our immature desires. The truth is Americans are engineered to remain children, with the goal of creating a spectrum spoiled brats becaus
Looks like an OSHA issue to me (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I wondered about that too. Amazon didn't tell their workers about the tornado warning? Why not?
Re: Looks like an OSHA issue to me (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The employees should have been sent to cover by the warehouse manager, when the tornado warning went into effect.
They were sent into cover at the tornado warning. Amazon also did multiple safety drills in the days prior. The article makes no sense whatsoever, Amazon warehouse had a PA system and it was used to transmit a warning.
Nobody expected the warehouse to actually be completely destroyed.
Re: Looks like an OSHA issue to me (Score:2)
Why wouldn't a collapse be a realistic option? Steel frame buildings with massive spans aren't the best for unexpected loads.
Re: (Score:2)
Why wouldn't a collapse be a realistic option? Steel frame buildings with massive spans aren't the best for unexpected loads.
Which is why tornado shelters exist. I suspect that either Amazon or the building owner (who is almost certainly not Amazon or both) just did not want to spend the money. A properly built shelter is a bunker that should survive almost anything.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The employees should have been sent to cover by the warehouse manager, when the tornado warning went into effect.
They were: https://twitter.com/Csmith0515... [twitter.com]
Self control (Score:2)
>"Amazon had for years prohibited workers from carrying their phones on warehouse floors, requiring them to leave them in vehicles or employee lockers before passing through security checks that include metal detectors."
People don't like it, but the reason is that a large number of people are completely addicted to their phones (social media, news sites, texting) and simply will not or can not stop messing with them on company time. I see it all the time. Inappropriate phone use can and often does huge
My warehouse did the same... I was fine with that (Score:5, Interesting)
To be fair, when I was working in a warehouse, we had endless problems with people using their phones while driving around on 8-ton machines, which created a lot of safety concerns and several high-profile accidents, including one nasty incident where a pedestrian got run over and his leg pinned against a wall. The situation was totally out of control. We had no choice but to ban phones on the floor, and it was because employees simply would not cooperate or compromise in any way. When our company announced the phone ban during lunch break, there was plenty of shouting and one guy nearly came to blows with a supervisor.
This was many years ago when smart phones were still new to the market, but I can't imagine the situation is any better today. I have no clue, since I retired years ago and don't own a phone since I have access to a PC all day.
I didn't like my employer for many reasons, but I have to say that when it came to phones, my co-workers really were acting like a bunch of spoiled children. If people didn't abuse their phones so much at work, on the road, or in school, it wouldn't be necessary to ban them.
Re: (Score:3)
>"This was many years ago when smart phones were still new to the market, but I can't imagine the situation is any better today. I have no clue, since I retired years ago "
Unfortunately, it is much, much worse.
Re: (Score:2)
Totally agree with you on this. We've all seen on the roadways the consequences of the unrestrained use of mobile phones, even where laws forbid this.
That said, any employer ought to be responsible for passing on to its employees public emergency messages and Amazon could be found severely liable here, since it denied employees independent access.
This is an quite an overstatement. The NWS issues alerts on a county-wide basis. We get alerts whe
Re: (Score:3)
This is why you need automation (Score:3)
Amazon should just force all its suppliers to send their products in robot friendly packaging instead of retail display form. This BS of needing workers sitting in a factory doing repetitive tasks is stupid. Robots + robotax funded universal basic income is the only way forward. Humans should not be doing manual labor to survive.
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent up!
These dull, dirty, physically debilitating and dehumanizing jobs should be automated and Amazon has the resources to make it happen.
Robot-friendly packaging would be lest wasteful than retail packaging which is often designed to deter theft in stores. As online shopping kills off silly brick-and-mortar legacy retail packaging should adapt and become more efficient.
Big question left out (Score:3)
Did the Amazon warehouse management issue a tornado warning through their PA system? Surely they got the same warning that people who had their cellphones on them got?
Re:Big question left out (Score:5, Informative)
Did the Amazon warehouse management issue a tornado warning through their PA system?
Yes, they did. Workers were taking shelter in secure areas. Unfortunately, they turned out to be not-so-secure.
No problem (Score:2)
They'll all get an emergency avalanche communicator instead.
This is why they need to unionize. (Score:2)
Here's an idea (Score:2)
I think maybe I could get a patent on it. I call it the "Tornado Shelter".
It works like this: When a tornado warning is issued, you have a place you can go
that is reinforced far better than the current structure you are in, built to survive
catastrophic weather events, yet less expensive than reinforcing an entire structure.
In cases where there are a plurality of occupants, the "Shelter" is large enough to
facilitate all relevant occupants. Other aspects of the invention may include
a) supplies such as food an
Wrong questions (Score:2)
It should raise concerns about amazon cutting corners in the building design and engineering.
Or... (Score:2)
Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander (Score:2)
I work at a Distribution Center (NOT Amazon) which has the same policy. The stated reason for that policy is that cell phones interfere with the wireless network upon which the warehouse infrastructure runs, and if an employee has access to the "guest" or "associate" wireless networks, it sucks bandwidth from the handheld and equipment-mounted terminals.
Hogwash.
"Guest" and "associate" networks aren't provisioned on the warehouse floor (and if they are, it's at best an invitation to abuse), and if cell phone
Candle Factory (Score:2)
Anyone remember the candle factory where a few dozen died? They apparently were permitted to have phones because there are quotes about relatives calling family members and seeing that their loved one's phone's location was still at the factory. But, since it's Amazon, it's easier to be outraged.
Cellphone argument misses a bigger issue? (Score:2)
I live in IL, not far from where this Amazon warehouse was located. (I also used to work for the company before I moved here.)
For starters? I think people should know that this facility was built on a flood plain. (They're right next door to another company who owns an equally big warehouse type structure; World Wide Technologies. Their building doesn't appear to have sustained any damage, but it easily could have been them instead if the tornado just changed direction slightly.) The land out there is so fl
Re: (Score:2)
Is this before or after the Marines die in a collapsing Amazon warehouse?
Don't feed the troll. (Score:2)
"That trick never works." Neither does shooting sock puppets. They just respawn.
phone addicts (Score:2)
You phone addicts are pathic. I cringe at the thought of a jury being so sick as to award anything to "victims" of smartphone withdrawal. Their brains are in their pants and it often drives them... much more so than when the expression is applied to men...
Businesses have fire alarms by code and exits by code. They need a tornado alarm by code-- we don't have any such regulation so it's OUR fault. Can't expect businesses to imagine every problem or create solutions for rare flukes.
In the past, enough people
Re: (Score:2)
NORAD can survive a nuke but not if attacked precisely enough.
no. building codes are the minimum. You can't build something that can take a direct attack at a reasonable price; you can have shelter areas--- and build them to regulation and even those are not bunkers because we don't think the odds require a 100% safe shelter area. The shelter may work 99.9999% of the time when a tornado strikes the area unless it's striking the shelter directly; which is rare enough that the shelters are deemed reasonable.