Leaked Amazon Memo Reveals Anti-Union PR Idea: Score Points by Hiring Former Inmates (vox.com) 89
Someone leaked an internal Amazon memo to Vox's Recode. The May 2021 memo "offers rare insights into the anti-union strategies of one of the world's most powerful companies," Recode writes:
The memo laid out two crucial goals for Amazon: establish and deepen "relationships with key policymakers and community stakeholders" and improve "Amazon's overall brand...." To achieve these goals, the memo proposed strategies to help Amazon boost its reputation and simultaneously "neutralize" company critics by befriending these critics' own allies and by launching feel-good initiatives to turn the media and local politicians into company boosters....
Amazon staff acknowledged in the memo that the Teamsters' "economic argument is ... currently stronger," with union truck drivers, warehouse workers, and grocery store staff earning better or equal compensation packages as Amazon employees in the Southern California region the memo focused on. (A few months later, in September 2021, Amazon announced it had raised its average starting wage for front-line workers to $18 an hour, though many workers make less than that....) Amazon shrewdly planned to "intentionally seek partnerships with some organizations that work closely with our opposition." Those included organizations dedicated to helping incarcerated people find stable work upon reentry into society, such as the Anti-Recidivism Coalition, Homeboy Industries, and Defy Ventures, all named in the memo....
Taken together, these proposals are an unsurprising but stark reminder that, as is the case with many corporations, Amazon's public-facing actions are overwhelmingly in service of promoting or protecting the company, often in reaction to critics demanding that the company improve its labor practices. The billboards and TV commercials selling the narrative of Amazon as a great place to work, and the PR-friendly community partnerships in towns across the country where Amazon wants to set up shop, are developed for these reasons. Altruism this is not....
Overall, the memo highlights the extent to which union-led criticisms are creating sizable obstacles to Amazon's growth plans in its most crucial US market. But they also serve as a clear reminder that the company possesses vast resources to combat critics, and cunning strategies to portray reputation makeovers as corporate benevolence.
Amazon staff acknowledged in the memo that the Teamsters' "economic argument is ... currently stronger," with union truck drivers, warehouse workers, and grocery store staff earning better or equal compensation packages as Amazon employees in the Southern California region the memo focused on. (A few months later, in September 2021, Amazon announced it had raised its average starting wage for front-line workers to $18 an hour, though many workers make less than that....) Amazon shrewdly planned to "intentionally seek partnerships with some organizations that work closely with our opposition." Those included organizations dedicated to helping incarcerated people find stable work upon reentry into society, such as the Anti-Recidivism Coalition, Homeboy Industries, and Defy Ventures, all named in the memo....
Taken together, these proposals are an unsurprising but stark reminder that, as is the case with many corporations, Amazon's public-facing actions are overwhelmingly in service of promoting or protecting the company, often in reaction to critics demanding that the company improve its labor practices. The billboards and TV commercials selling the narrative of Amazon as a great place to work, and the PR-friendly community partnerships in towns across the country where Amazon wants to set up shop, are developed for these reasons. Altruism this is not....
Overall, the memo highlights the extent to which union-led criticisms are creating sizable obstacles to Amazon's growth plans in its most crucial US market. But they also serve as a clear reminder that the company possesses vast resources to combat critics, and cunning strategies to portray reputation makeovers as corporate benevolence.
Brilliant (Score:2)
Re:Brilliant (Score:4, Interesting)
Most employers that routinely hire from halfway houses and post-release job services do pay poorly and/or exploit their workers. It's hard to get a job when you're an ex-con, and as far as halfway houses go . . . they're a captive audience, so to speak. Not too far off from H1B/H2B workers actually. They can't negotiate for better pay or switch jobs. They just get what they're given.
Re: (Score:2)
That's entirely orthogonal to the point.
H1Bs can't switch employers. Neither can halfway house inmates. They're all tied to their jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
The GP sounds like an industry plant. Why else go off on a H1B bender on this thread?
Re: (Score:2)
That's entirely orthogonal to the point.
H1Bs can't switch employers. Neither can halfway house inmates. They're all tied to their jobs.
Erm no.
A person who has been released from prison has full working rights the same as any other citizen UNLESS having a specific court ordered restriction (I.E. if convicted of bank fraud, you'll be restricted from jobs in the finance sector). They aren't comparable in the slightest, aside from the fact that in the US both are abused.
An ex-con should be given the same rights as anyone else, but the US seems intent on trying to punish them even if they want to turn their lives around.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That has not been my experience of H1-B workers. The ones I have worked with were average developers at best.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Uhm yes the law says that.
The reality is employers go through the paperwork and hire the chosen H1B.
The way to do it is create a job description that the only person on the planet qualified is your H1B. How do I know this? Because that's what my immigration lawyer had me do when I wanted to hire a guy I knew at my new company. Did this a few times over the years at different places.
Re: Brilliant (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
By law, H-1B workers are only hired when a company cannot find US workers up to the task. Mainly because companies have issues finding competent talent in the US, so world class consulting companies like WiPro and Infosys have to go overseas to get competent people. H-1B workers are true experts hired on because of their expertise and field knowledge.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!
Re: (Score:2)
Short sighted? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Wouldnâ(TM)t companies like Amazon be more profitable if all low wage workers earned more?
No, of course not. If you work for me and I pay you $100 more each month, you are likely to spend $90 elsewhere. Of the $10 that is returned to me, $9 goes to cost-of-goods and additional overhead. So I get $1 back as profit.
Re: (Score:2)
Who are you quoting/replying to?
Re: (Score:2)
My guess would be Alvian's since he quoted the post.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that's odd. His post originally showed up for me as a reply to an entirely different post.
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon would be even more profitable if everyone else raised wages. Just not Amazon.
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed, and in fact, Amazon would only be more profitable if everyone else raised wages — whether Amazon raised wages or not. Further, Amazon would be more profitable if everyone but Amazon raised wages, just like everyone else — which is why nobody will do it unless forced. Since most of the force currently being applied to move government is in the form of legal bribery, The People's will is not done. And guess who lobbies against real minimum wage increase? Amazon, who's pushing the $15/hour [businessinsider.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Imagine being so triggered by an obviously satirical publicity stunt that you're still fuming about it 4 years later!
The 18% "male tax" was designed to highlight that women earn, on average, that much less than men for the same work. The whole point of it was that it was completely unfair.
Stop being such a snowflake.
Re: (Score:2)
Creating unfair policies to complain about unfair policies?
It's insane that this didn't equal profit lol
Re: (Score:2)
Where's the bad part? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Where's the bad part? (Score:4)
Why do you think their acts are "cost-free"?
If hiring ex-convicts was really cost-free, other companies would already be doing it, and it would be a non-issue.
Re: (Score:2)
What is the cost, out of interest? In the UK I don't see any additional costs for most jobs, but we don't normally do background checks here and I think they are probably illegal. Jobs working with children need everyone to be checked, criminal record or not.
The main reason why people with records have trouble getting hired is simple prejudice.
Re: (Score:1)
We absolutely did background checks on our UK employees using UK resources. Definitely not illegal. Software developers not dealing with children.
And yes it is pre-judging people. If an ex-con and someone else was equally qualified but not an ex-con was applying, I'd hire them. The ex-con has already demonstrated their willingness to commit crimes. What is it about a jail term has changed their moral and ethical structure for the better?
Would you allow ex-cons around kids?
What if those ex-cons had chil
Re: (Score:2)
We absolutely did background checks on our UK employees using UK resources. ... What if those ex-cons had child sexual assault charges in their past. No? Aren't you just pre-judging them?
That's true. When looking for a job I frequently do background checks on employers and then pre-judge them. If the employer turns out to be greedy fucktard with distinclty fascist tendencies and who's generally just full shit I'll go work for somebody who doesn't display those characteristics. It's not illegal so there is every reason to exercise due diligence.
Re: (Score:2)
When was this? I'd have thought that most typical background check stuff would be a GDPR violation. The applicant can't freely give consent if it is a condition of getting the job, so the only legal basis is that the data is necessary for the purpose of employing them. That might be arguable in certain cases, like trusted bank staff or people who need security clearance.
Most developer jobs though, where the employer just wants to know if the applicant has any debt so they can lowball them, or if what they w
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Giving ex-cons a second chance is just the sort of dishonorable capitalist plot that I'd expect out of the cigar chomping fat cats.
Re: (Score:2)
Using ex-cons in subterfuge is just the sort of dishonorable capitalist plot that I'd expect out of the cigar chomping fat cats.
Re: (Score:2)
Using ex-cons in subterfuge is just the sort of dishonorable capitalist plot that I'd expect out of the cigar chomping fat cats.
The author seems to be subliminally messaging it, so I don't blame you for thinking this, but where is the subterfuge, here?
We aren't talking about hiring ex cons to rough up union organizers, or dress up like the opposition and do bad stuff in their name, or anything like that. We're talking about Amazon identifying concentrations of people who don't like them, or are easily recru
Re: (Score:1)
This is another reminder that corporations have a different morality than the rest of us. Their morality is simple, more profits is good, less profits is bad. Sometimes it can lead to good things, sometimes to bad.
In this case this is mixed. Amazon is doing good things to make people like them, but the reason they are doing these things is to continue paying their warehouse workers a shit wage for quite a difficult job. If their workers felt they are getting a good deal they wouldn't feel the urge to unioni
Re: (Score:2)
This is another reminder that corporations have a different morality than the rest of us. Their morality is simple, more profits is good, less profits is bad.
I actually disagree, I think the problem is that this ISN'T true, anymore. The "Corporate Social Responsibility" movement has largely succeeded in subsuming shareholder interests to whatever the media can convince the public that corporations need to do.
Re: (Score:2)
The reason they are doing these things is for good PR. I don't see the problem with that. It's similar to all the compnies going green. It produces a net-good but you are complaining that the motive - wanting to look good - is flawed so they may as well not bother.
If you are a convicted fellon, then you have less oppertunties and may have to take lower paying jobs. We can debate if jobs should even be able to view your past criminal history but that is a different debate. (I personally think if you served
Re: (Score:1)
But they are not simply competing in the court of public opinion. They want to actively co-opt those organizations that support unions. If anything, it is very targeted. In my estimation, it is playing a dirty game of pool.
Re: Where's the bad part? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Correct. If Union's motives were not profit driver and simply pro-worker, they should be happy with the changes they helped drive instead of complaining that the postive changes hurt the unions from growing larger.
Re: (Score:2)
Competing in the court of public opinion by winning people over and forming partnerships is not necessarily a bad thing. In fact it sounds like what Amazon's critics should want them to move towards, assuming those critics are acting in good faith. What does this memo reveal that is actually bad, other than by presumption?
There's a difference between seeking partnerships with organizations that do good things and seeking partnerships with organizations that currently back your opponents in an effort to co-opt their support.
For instance, if Amazon decisively wins its anti-union fight do you expect it to remain dedicated to those partnerships? Moreover, if their main objective in the partnership is screwing over the Teamster's then whatever actions or initiatives come out of it aren't going to sink very deeply into the corpora
Land of the free? Irresponsible citizens. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Your message is a bit confusing.
Are you advocating free condoms and more Black abortions?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Gee, maybe if Americans just decided to be well-employed, they wouldn't need to put themselves in these positions. Now, how about you give your plan for that to happen?
Re: (Score:2)
1) go to school
2) don't drink
3) don't do drugs
4) stop partying all the time. See #1
5) use condoms consistently
6) take responsibility for your life
7) see #s 1,2,3,4,5,6.
8) live 1-6 consistently.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
2) Suffer and do not enjoy your life at all.
3) See #2.
4) See nums #2-3.
5) That's going to be illegal soon.
6) Don't expect or demand anything of us. (Politicans, C-Level executives, Shareholders, etc.) Who refuse to use their ridiculous wealth responsibly.
7) See #s 1,2,3,4,5,6.
8) Die. Because we don't give a fuck and living like this consistently is a one-way ticket to an early grave.
Re: (Score:2)
Add
#9...Never ever make a mistake
Let me know when your ass stays dry when you walk on water
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Land of the free? Irresponsible citizens. (Score:5, Insightful)
Just avoid being born to poor parents, that's the key. When selecting parents, make sure they can afford to live near good schools and good jobs. Then you won't need a car to get to work. Ideally they should be in a position to give you interest free loans too. That how responsible people like Elon Musk pulled themselves up by their bootstraps.
Remember: If you aren't living a miserable, joy-free existence, you are wasting money on "entertainment" and "relief from the soul crushing grind of your shitty life". You should be investing that money in high return products, like Bitcoin.
Re: (Score:1)
Life is unfair. Nothing will ever change. Deal with it. People born poor have a way out and up which has worked quite well for most over the last hundred years:
(Copied from my other post because it applies here too and I didn't want you to miss out)
1) go to school
2) don't drink
3) don't do drugs
4) stop partying all the time. See #1
5) use condoms consistently
6) take responsibility for your life (no one else will)
7) see #s 1,2,3,4,5,6.
8) live 1-6 consistently.
Life has no guarantees but follow that plan for
Re: (Score:2)
Do you know why children have fewer rights, e.g. they can't vote or drive a car, and sex with them is illegal?
It's because children, due to having less developed minds, lack the judgement and personal responsibility needed to safely do those things.
Re: (Score:2)
Why are Americans so irresponsible? Just don't put yourself in a situation where you have to take a crappy job and this whole union thing becomes a non-issue.
You could easily write the same paragraph about any group that's been taken advantage of, and if you did that to most groups you would be identified as the shitheel that you are. But because you picked Americans, you will probably see many boosters, despite Americans having been deliberately and systematically dumbed down to make them easier to manipulate.
It's also a stupid thing to write on a whole variety of other levels, not least that Americans are hardly unique in needing protection from unions since o
Re: (Score:2)
You could easily write the same paragraph about any group that's been taken advantage of, and if you did that to most groups you would be identified as the shitheel that you are. But because you picked Americans, you will probably see many boosters, despite Americans having been deliberately and systematically dumbed down to make them easier to manipulate.
Several friends of mine have gotten out of the ghetto by leveraging affirmative action and staying away from negative influences in the ghetto. They listened to their parents who told them not to go down the hole they went down. Now their siblings and cousins beg them for money instead of leveraging the same programs and getting themselves out. Most left the city they grew up in to get away from them. Their family members aren't "systematically dumbed down". Through their own doing, they systematically fail
Re: (Score:2)
Several friends of mine have gotten out of the ghetto by leveraging affirmative action and staying away from negative influences in the ghetto
Weird reframing. We're talking about systemic inequalities between classes across the country and you decide to hyperfocus.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, big self-own, I live in the most successful and influential state in the country. I don't know how I will go on after this embarrassment.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
LOL. You are so full of your own BS that you can't even recognize the fact that people who want to change their situation have the tools with which to do it, some just choose not to use them. For those, unlike you, with enough maturity to see past racism, they realize this comes down to personal behavior, not skin tone.
First, how did we get on racism? That wasn't even what we were talking about.
Second, if you don't see that some people will treat you worse because of the color of your skin regardless of your behavior (even before they have a chance to witness it, in fact) then there's literally no point in engaging you on racism regardless.
Re: Land of the free? Irresponsible citizens. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
[citation needed]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe he's just still one of the Americans who believes in concepts like personal responsibility? Good for him, I say -- and I don't CARE if "the rest of the world" deems him a shitheel for speaking the truth.
It doesn't really matter if he's speaking to a group that has been taken advantage of or not! He's not addressing that particular problem! The whole point is -- for every person who fares better than average in life, there's another who fares worse. And every time some socialist moron decides THEY have
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I started my career in a union job. For the time it was tech (early 80s).
Then sillycon valley happened and there was "gold in them thar hills!" and as union people we were "only" paid what the union contract called for and everyone paid the same. As individuals, we couldn't extract based on our abilities to perform and/or BS. Resentment of the union and the paltry union dues set in and that company (and union) collapsed.
I also have a record (post union). Been through the whole background check thing
Re: (Score:2)
You are honestly saying that cities were intentionally built to force people to drive and that is part of a design to keep people poor? Then state in the same place that the areas that did what you think everywhere should be doing doesn't actually favor the poor and costs more - and act like that part of the same anti-poor city planning schemes?
Cheap labor is always needed (Score:2)
I used to work for a smallish food distributor with 3 warehouses with the main one being in Detroit. That was where they were founded and have their main office, but I worked in another state. One of the highlights of my first visit to Detroit as an employee was a sign just inside that said all new applicants would be drug tested. I just laughed because they hadn't drug tested me and didn't even ask me to sign anything saying I would consent to such a thing.
The other amusing thing was someone pointed out t
Re: (Score:1)
No, they'll buy robots which will fail.
Amazon being unable to retain long term workers is a sign of capitalism working.
They pay shit wages for hard work. People quit. If they paid more, people would stay even if the job sucked. In a non-capitalist economy the people would work where assigned, like it or not. Capitalism = freedom.
Re: (Score:2)
Being able to legally pay shit wages is a sign of capitalism not working for The People.
When you say "capitalism is working" all that means is that it's managed to self-perpetuate until now. But it's now destroying the biosphere. That's unsustainable, so it's not "working".
Amazon Prime Original Series (Score:2)
If you told me there was a new TV drama series about a fictitious corporation that was hiring former inmates as a means to disrupt union organizing activities I'd say that may sound interesting....
Kind of crazy how life imitates art.... would be kind of hilarious if someone in corporate came across the idea as a screenplay but passed on the idea because they thought it'd be better to actually implement the idea as opposed to making a tv show/movie about it....
Re: (Score:2)
It wouldn't supprise me for Amazon to produce a series like that. Hollywood is full of virtual signaly wealthy elites that want to tell everyone else how they should be less profit driven.
Watching actors/sports stars/etc that get paid millions while the workers that make their job work get underpaid complain about CEO wages always strikes me as pretty self serving,
News for Nerds? (Score:1)
I have an idea (Score:2)
Many of the actions engaged in by Amazon strike me as things that would be criminal if performed by regular citizens. So let's toss a bunch of Amazon's C-level wonks into prison. Then they can become "future former inmates", benefitting from their company's "benevolence" when they get jobs in 'Zon warehouses.
Changes Comes Sickly (Score:3)
Imagine being so terrified of unions that you're willing to do other "good" things to undermine the union movement.
Every time I read about a company spending millions to campaign against unions, it makes me like unions more. Double the effect when they put effort into improving the workplace.
They could have been not-terrible all along, but it's only "in the company's interest" when they're opposing unionization.
It's a free country (Score:2)
Let Amazon make its case and union make its case, and then the workers can decide. So long as nobody is roughing up either scabs or organizers, choice is good. The first thing a legit union would do is limit outsourcing and H1 hires to keep wages of existing members up, so a sizable fraction of employees are better off with corporate management rather than the union calling the shots.
How naive is Vox? (Score:2)