Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses United States

Amazon Fined By Regulators For Unsafe Warehouse Work Conditions (techcrunch.com) 43

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Federal regulators from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) found that three Amazon warehouse facilities had violated legislation designed to require employers to provide safe working environments. Investigations found that Amazon workers are at high risk for back injuries and other musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), especially in warehouse environments that prioritize speed over safety. Amazon must pay a $60,269 fine for the violations at warehouses in Deltona, Florida; Waukegan, Illinois; and New Windsor, New York. As part of the same investigation, OSHA found in December that six Amazon warehouse facilities had failed to record and report worker injuries and illnesses. There are three similar, ongoing investigations at Amazon facilities in Colorado, Idaho and New York.

OSHA's findings show an ongoing pattern of employee injuries, including stuck-by injuries while handling objects over 50 pounds. An example report from July reads, "crushing/smashing; face; furniture (61 lbs)." Another reads, "strain/sprain; lower leg; fitness equipment (148 lbs.)" The Florida warehouse was also cited for being too hot, which can potentially cause heat-related illness. Amazon has on-site clinics called Amcare for employees who may suffer injuries on the job, but OSHA claims that these facilities can be prohibitive to workers receiving adequate medical care. Amazon employees told investigators that the Amcare clinic in Deltona, Florida, required injured workers to wait three weeks after an injury before they could be referred to a physician. OSHA also found that if an employee suffered head trauma and dizziness, they were not immediately referred to a physician.
Further reading: Amazon Kicks Off Round of Job Cuts Affecting 18,000 People
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Amazon Fined By Regulators For Unsafe Warehouse Work Conditions

Comments Filter:
  • Tip of the iceberg (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Slashythenkilly ( 7027842 ) on Wednesday January 18, 2023 @10:38PM (#63221518)
    Between non-competitive and non-negotiable marketplace contracts with vendors, truckers, delivery partners, and is own employees, I hope Amazon is ready for a rude awakening about the realities of labor costs and costs of doing business.
    • Only if the rest of the iceberg is people stopping buying from Amazon in large enough numbers.
      • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

        by rsilvergun ( 571051 )
        Customers won't matter after the workers unionize. Amazon will deal or shut down.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          Not in this political climate. There's still a lot of suspicion-rhetoric around unions wielding their power. Too hard too early will give plenty of ammunition to the GOP. The alt-right will rally against it being woke.

          We've literally seen alt-right idiots on this site calling corporatist money grabs as being "woke". They're too stupid to tell the difference and are an unfortunately potent political force.
        • The long-term solution is robots. Human employees should not be doing work that can injure them.

          I expected Amazon warehouses to be 99% automated decades ago, but they'll eventually figure it out.

      • I can't stop! I cant STOP! I NEVER bought ANYTHING on Amazon.
    • The 18,000 being laid off are the result of "the realities of labor costs and costs of doing business".

      But yeah, you go ahead and keep wishing for those costs to be exacerbated...

      • by rossz ( 67331 ) <[ogre] [at] [geekbiker.net]> on Thursday January 19, 2023 @12:16AM (#63221630) Journal

        The 18,000 laid off is Amazon seeing how much they can sacrifice the health and safety of the remaining workers to increase profits even more. Expect more layoffs because a $60k fine is a bargain.

      • The 18,000 being laid off is the result of a market where you don't need to deprive your competitor of resources. Those 18,000 were tactical hires. They were hired to ensure competitors had to reach for worse and/or more expensive workers. They were shelfed so other companies could not hire them.

        Now that this is no longer a viable option, you can dump them back onto the street because that tactic doesn't work out anymore.

    • IANAL, but I do know that for there to be a valid contract, there must be a "meeting of the minds," which isn't present if the terms are non-negotiable. If Amazon is offering only "take it or leave it" terms, those "contracts" won't stand up in court, especially if the terms are as one-sided as I'd expect them to be.
      • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

        IANAL, but I do know that for there to be a valid contract, there must be a "meeting of the minds," which isn't present if the terms are non-negotiable. If Amazon is offering only "take it or leave it" terms, those "contracts" won't stand up in court, especially if the terms are as one-sided as I'd expect them to be.

        The term for this is a "contract of adhesion". Such contracts generally are enforceable, because a meeting of the minds is assumed to have occurred. However, there is a catch. If the courts find that such a contract contains terms that a reasonable person would not be expected to have accepted, had those terms been explicitly negotiated, then those terms are likely to get struck down as unconscionable by the courts. So there are limits to how outrageous they can get, at least when it comes to enforceabi

    • "...non-negotiable marketplace contracts with vendors, truckers, delivery partners..."

      I'm in this business and curious to understand what you mean by that.

      While Amazon's footprint certainly looms large in the logistics business, I've never heard of "non negotiable" contracts with truckers, warehouses etc. They may offer 'take it or leave it' prices, but 'leaving it' is always an option and many choose it. That is the most essential negotiating position.

    • This is Amazon.com working as intended based on their executive board's & lawyers' calculations of risk, liability, & profit. They believe they can get away with it.
  • by Eunomion ( 8640039 ) on Wednesday January 18, 2023 @11:03PM (#63221546)
    For fuck's sake. When you fine a corporation less than the profit they made on the violation (let alone so much less that it's not even noise in the calculation of the profit), it's not a fine: It's a piece of the action. Governments that tout their "enforcement actions" but settle for this kind of payment are actually teaming up with the "defendants" against the public.
    • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Thursday January 19, 2023 @01:10AM (#63221676)

      Or maybe the regulators had a weak case and settled for $60k rather than spending $500k on a losing court case and then getting nothing.

      • It's literally their job to enforce regulations. This is not that. This is the equivalent of begging for spare change outside of Amazon's corporate headquarters.
    • It's like our flat traffic fines that basically result in rich kids ignoring any and all traffic laws.

      The only time I actually remember someone got into trouble for that was when he started flaunting it by holding his hand out every time he got pulled over, snapped his fingers and called "check please!" to the officer.

      • by flink ( 18449 )

        Around here 3 moving violations within 1 year or 7 in 2 years and you will start racking up license suspensions and court summons.

  • 60k is what 10sec of normal business operation for them. Unless you start fining a company like that 600million for small things and in billions for larger things. They will NOT change how they operate cause its not even pocket change to them.
    • The only way to fine them its close the offending warehouses, till the safety measures are in place. Everything else its not a fine.

  • prioritize speed over safety they need an union!

  • by rossz ( 67331 ) <[ogre] [at] [geekbiker.net]> on Thursday January 19, 2023 @12:13AM (#63221626) Journal

    A $60k fine is a rounding error to Amazon. To Amazon, that's couch change.

    The fine needs a few more zeros added to the end to get their attention.

    • I don't necessarily disagree with you, but I think that it would be reasonable for the fines to be based more on that specific warehouse, not Amazon as a whole, because local violations can be a thing.

      However, there should be a steep and steady climb in the penalties if they continue.

    • Lawyers are sharpening their swords. Not keeping records, and a fine confirms inadequacy. Their Insurance company should null and void their policy yesterday - grounds - non-compliance proven by the fine . Now they can play decades of individual compensation, and discovery demands. Now the 60K fine is a shameful joke - I mean lower than supermarket slip and fall injuries. Injured workers need to keep a copy of their own records, including why they believe they would be canned for 'complaining'.
      • Keep in mind that fines are to the government, which is different than injury claims and payments, which go to the victim. The latter being much higher than the former is probably to be expected in most cases.

        That said, having to pay for injuries is often enough to keep a business interested in minimizing them. For example, my dad's work hired a safety officer. He paid for himself the first year easily through avoided injuries and subsequent medical care, lost time, and everything.

        That said, dad was in H

  • The other Slashdot story says that Amazon is ending its Amazon Smile program. The program gave $500M in charity over 10 years, and represents 0.5% of sales of those who participated. Let's pretend all of Amazon merchants/shoppers participants to make it the biggest possible number.

    I'll break it down for the division-challenged:
    $500M is 0.5%
    $1B is 1%
    $100B is the gross take Amazon makes. This number is actually higher because not ALL of the merchants and shoppers participate in the Smile program.

    Here alon

  • I assume the money collected will be given to the workers who were put in danger?

    No?

  • Amazon does not want people getting injured. Injured people have to go to the doctor, which Amazon pays for. They also can't work for a time which Amazon also pays for. The problem is they incentivize managers to prioritize speed over safety, and there's no downside for them. If people get hurt they still get paid as long as they hit their numbers.
    • by Anonymous Coward

      Amazon are currently rolling out safety metrics as part of their performance management process so this is changing at least.

      There's a lot of Slashdotters talking about Amazon being souless and evil and doing all this on purpose and for profit, but your post is one of the few that seems to grasp that it's not intentional, it's just an unfortunate side effect of organisations getting so large - it's so damn hard to track everything, and to spot and tackle unintended consequences like managers being willing t

He who steps on others to reach the top has good balance.

Working...