Amazon Told Drivers Not to Worry About In-Van Surveillance Cameras. Now Footage Is Leaking Online::undefined

  • money_loo@1337lemmy.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s true, but Amazon pays above the national average, which itself desperately needs to rise.

    • Stitch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is a stronger indictment of the national work landscape than a boon for Amazon, who has a over 100% turnover rate…

      • money_loo@1337lemmy.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Again, I agree.

        I’m not an executive, if I could raise the national average for all of us believe me I would.

      • jscummy
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Amazon pays pretty decently but it’s just god awful work. I worked in a warehouse briefly and made more than I had anywhere else entry level, but sorting boxes for 9 hours straight on night shifts isn’t worth it

        • designatedhacker@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s a turnover rate over time. If everyone quit and had to be replaced in a day you’d be at 100%. Anything after that is over 100% for the year.

          I’ve seen rates of 150% bandied around for Amazon. That means replacing 12.5% of your total headcount on average monthly.

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

            I’m not great with math so please let me know if I’m understanding this right:

            1. Company has 100 employees
            2. All 100 employees quit
            3. Company gets 100 new employees as replacement

            = 100% turnover rate

            Then…

            1. Company has the 100 new employees
            2. 50 of the new employees quit
            3. Company gets 50 new employees as replacement

            = 150% turnover rate

            and so on?

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Turnover rates are usually described annually. If a company has to replace it’s whole staff twice in a year, that’s a 200% annual turnover rate.

        • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It wasn’t obvious as “Amazon” has a lot of jobs and these drivers aren’t even employed by Amazon in the first place.

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

            Amazon has lots of jobs, yes. But context is king.

            If I say “Developers stay at Facebook because Meta pays them above average”, will you be confused on who is “them” because Meta has many jobs? Will you think that maybe they’re saying that Meta pays janitors above average?

            It’s not a difficult thing to understand by context.

            • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Again, these drivers aren’t even Amazon employees, so yes it is confusing when someone says something as vague as “Amazon pays above the national average” when discussing people who specifically don’t work for Amazon.