> is handing out “Thanks to you, we will deliver” T-shirts to its fulfillment associates.
Is it too hard to say "warehouse workers" instead of convoluted and misleading terms like "fulfillment associates"?
> It is a societal statement on their power dynamics, not a hypocritical act.
There is no societal statement. It's self-serving PR. And if Amazon is so hell-bent on announcing pay hikes and toot their own horn on how great they are for increasing wages then it should also be ok when they are called out for backpedalling on their actions.
> Amazon wants to be seen as exploitative today, because it will morally justify the layoffs tomorrow once all this is automated away.
Since when does Amazon have a plan to cease to be exploitative? Last time I've checked, Amazon was firing warehouse workers for complaining about unsafe working conditions, and then mobilizing VPs to put on smear campaigns targeting their own workers to avoid having to do anything about the problem.
I try to objectively characterize their reasoning.
I see comments about how it is awful of me to call them “fulfillment associates”—but this is the term Amazon picked[0]. And they chose it to represent how they see it fit in their worldview.
My personal feelings? I am saddened by the lack of compassion. But the only way for people to optimize for the fulfillment of all lives instead of the minimization of all costs requires, at this point, a far teleportation of the Overton window in the political discourse.
“fulfillment associates” - wow, the word employee is too laden with Socialist entitlement! Let’s new-speak them into “associates”... sounds like a Country Club membership
Amazon is not handing out ‘Thank you’ T-shirts to its warehouse workers.
It is handing out “Thanks to you, we will deliver” T-shirts to its fulfillment associates.
It is a societal statement on their power dynamics, not a hypocritical act.
Amazon wants to be seen as exploitative today, because it will morally justify the layoffs tomorrow once all this is automated away.