Workers at Amazon Warehouse don't get paid for Screening when they leave. thoughts?

Exactly, the employees steal more than customers.

 

SERIOUSLY..

Try driving onto an airport, naval base or state prison grounds with a load of DIRT..... WE do not get paid detention pay while under Gov't contract BUT we get these great paying jobs because WE CAN PASS any test given...

SECURITY is a 2 way street and all of this WHINING is exactly what gets people hurt....financially,bodily or employment wise...

I will leave you with this......"If all you can do is B!itch,you are part of the PROBLEM...if you find a better idea,be part of the solution"

 

BULL$HIT...

They "Build " these where land is cheap,towns or states give them tax breaks and you price check your facts; DC's have some of the best pay scales for folks WILLING TO LEARN or BE TRAINED.......I personally know folks who gave up their "Keys" after 10-15 years and went into a national DC.....3 years later are at same wage as driving paid BUT NOW are home every night and have bene's....

PLUS,check out the local economies once these "CENTERS" are built, the two little towns in NH next to a national DC are booming ,you DO NOT DO THAT on minimum wage pay...


The other side of that is "old school"...."If a few items are missing it will NOT HURT BOTTOM LINE"....take that one DC trailer with 4-5 stores on it, take 5-10 boxes of freight MIA at each stop ; 5 days a week and count your DOLLARS....These are freight boxes; not one bic lighter but 100, not 1 stereo but 10,not one set of dishes but 6.....add it up and you will quickly see WHY companies have to "POLICE" their own.........SAD BUT TRUE!!!!!

 

what does any of that have anything to do with crying about going though security, and you said yourself the job requires no skill, so what people should get desirable wages for showing up and doing something anyone can? do you think they would be better off on unemployment or some other public dole, you make it sound like it's a shame they have a job.

 

pretty black and white imo... employer is requiring you to spend time doing something company related AFTER you are off the clock...

some of the comments are sad.. most are simply strawmen. hourly employees should get paid for the time they're doing something for the company (no, not commuting so don't build that strawman). if your employer told you to go stand in the corner for 20 minutes after you were off the clock, you'd have a problem with that too. and yes, salaried employees are different - we all know that. comes with the territory.

for all the people using the term whining, and that people should just be happy to have a job... move along. that's bullshit - abusing people because we give them a job is not justification. I can take that the next logical step and say we should repeal all the laws we've made to protect workers rights... child labor, etc.

 

My question, how many people are leaving at this time and does this happen on every shift ????? is 30 minutes a LONG time or is someone just WHINING....???

Their "hire package" had to have these "time zones" included and people,

PLEASE.....do you really think Amazon, Walmart or any other Mom & Pop WANTS to have extra security on payroll to help curb thefts $$$$$$$...??

 

Didn't Apple already lose a court case over the same thing? If you are hourly and at work, you should be getting paid. Pretty simple stuff.

 

I'm bitter because I'm so fed up with people being entitled like everyone owes them something and this thread is a perfect example.

Know how to fix this issue immediately and shut up the whiners? Take their base pay for 8hrs worth of work.... add in the time it takes for security (lets say 1/2hr) then divide 8-1/2hrs work into their daily pay and pay them less per hour. That should shut them up.

When I figured out my salary do you think I'm so retarded like these people that I factor in 40hrs per week or 8hrs per day? Hell no! I factor in the average amount of hours I work like these people should.

Average hourly worker works 2,087 hrs per year. So if you factor in an additional half hour per shift those people need to take their yearly salary and divide by 2217 hrs for their pay rate. Pretty freaking simple.

Instead they feel entitled to get paid for those 130hrs by suing their employer who is the only one who takes care of them.

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

 

No, there has been no establishment. Hence my wording stating IF there was a handbook and if it was distributed and signed for. Since the day I started working my very first job I have only had ONE job that did not require me to sign a form stating I received and READ the employee handbook that I was given. That is the basis behind my comment. I was simply stating that IF the handbook states this process, and the employees signed the handbook, then they accepted that this would happen, and such is life.

I'm not trying to argue with anyone about whether or not this is right or it is wrong. My contention is that many many many times there ARE situations where things are in the employee handbook, and employees complain about it later. If I owned a shop with 250k employees, and had a problem with theft, I would consider something similar to this, and to be honest, I really don't know if I would set this before or after the clock-out. Everyone can armchair-quarterback a multi-billion dollar corporation, but unless you are at the reigns, you don't know all the details, and neither do I. A simple bit of math here, if each employee took 10 minutes to go through the screening process, and there are 250K employees, that would average 2.5 million minutes of time each day. If the average pay was $10 per hour (Using that number for simple math) then it would cost $416,666 EACH DAY to the parent company. Yeah, after seeing THOSE numbers, I think I would have a handbook stating a screening process is in effect between clocking out and leaving the building. If you don't like those rules, then don't accept the job offer.

I can understand an employee worried about 10 minutes a day after work, because time is important. But where do you draw the line? Some employees live 10 minutes away, others 50. Should we compensate those who drive the extra 40 minutes to get to work? Of course not. It's part of having a job. So is this process. To the individual, they could technically say that the extra 10 minutes in the screening process adds up to $8.33 per week. To the COMPANY you are talking about $2 MILLION dollars a week. Are you willing to pay more money for what you buy from Amazon so that these employees get compensated? Because this is what it really would boil down to, because Amazon is not going to take that cost out of their coffers, it will trickle down to the customers.

 

I've been through the warehouse security at Amazon and places like it. Its not abuse, only a whiner would think that. oh and my company didn't pay me for it either, and i never even considered the idea that i should have been.

 

If we all were of the same opinion, the world would be a boring place and I appreciate the time you spent explaining your position.

I admit my previous comment may have been a little overzealous. I don't believe in entitlements other than whats granted me by our constitution. I believe it's up to all of us to do what we can to make gainful employment more attractive than suckling at the government teat.

The availability of a workforce also plays highly into where the centers are located. I did a little research and discovered that the average wage for an Amazon Warehouse worker is around $12/h. This is higher than the proposed new minimum wage. I was a little surprised.

I absolutely believe the employees need to be screened. Amazon themselves have stated that the security screening process takes little or no time at all (link below). So by paying the employee during screening shouldn't add hardly any cost. On the other hand if screening time is a chronic problem then it's in Amazon's (or the labor company's) best interest to address it.

The court listened to arguments yesterday: http://online.wsj.com/articles/u-s-supreme-court-considers-pay-for-amazon-workers-security-checks-1412798135

Sometimes it's hard to read people when you can't see their expressions or hear the tone of their voice. At the end of the day I believe I'd share a beer with any one of you.

 

same

 

You buying?

 

I will get 2nd round

I don't think we should invite Boyd though. You know being from Jersey and all

 

Boyd is a must have anytime, otherwise there will be no strippers or anyone to poke fun about having hockey hair. Truth

 

Valid points. Will allow it.

 

1st round's on me!

 

Ya so, I've worked for people, I've been let go, I've relocted 100s of miles away from my family for jobs. I've always scored the top score on any and all of my work evaluations. Been in management and been hourly. Owned my own company with several employees for years and survived fine working for myself. I see & understand both sides.

I understand (I think) you're talking to the general population and not specifically to me (if you are speaking specifically to me, you have no clue what you're talking about). Just wanted to ensure you that I am happy where I'm at, this is not a problem I suffer. I'm also ultra conservative so much so, I can't even really be myself on a liberal site like TW. But, as I see it, you're arguing for an "entitlement" for a company and I'm arguing that if a company requires an employee to remain on the property off the clock they are fucking the employee. We're just not going to see eye to eye on the topic.

 

That would work too.

I do it everyday myself and I've done it at many airports. Airport security is nothing but window dressing.