What Amazon Isn't Telling You (ripping off its workers, evading taxes and its bosses lining their pockets)

Hi John,

On Wednesday, Amazon bosses will be schmoozing with their shareholders at the big company annual meeting. CEO Jeff Bezos will be boasting record sales. But we’ve teamed up with some Amazon workers to make sure that’s not the only story that gets told.

Will you share this video to make sure the truth behind Amazon’s sales are heard this week?

While Jeff’s lining his pockets, Amazon workers are paying the price. Their testimonies are a dismal tale of miserable working conditions, stress, poverty wages and job insecurity. With reports of aggressive anti-union tactics, Amazon workers often feel unable to speak about their treatment.

The more people that see this video, the more difficult it’ll be for Amazon to admit it’s just about making money. Amazon sees their thousands of temporary workers as disposable items. But these are people, and it’s time Amazon treated their workers fairly.

On Wednesday, a few Amazon workers are heading to the meeting in Seattle to get the truth out and demand some change. Let’s make sure their story is shared far and wide: can you watch and share the video below with your friends and family?

Share the video Amazon doesn’t want you to see.

Lots of love,

Amazon Anonymous x

 

PS. You might have seen in the news: Amazon has decided that paying *some* tax in the UK might be a good idea after all. As of this month, they are aiming to pay corporation tax in the UK.

Let’s take it with a pinch of salt - and see how much they actually pay! But it’s a great sign that Amazon caves to pressure. To the thousands of us who boycotted the rotten company over the Christmas, through to the independent bookshops who are fighting back: the pressure works as long as we keep at it :) 

Demo for Cambodian living wages outside Adidas in Oxford St this Wed 10am

I got this email from SERTUC this morning:-
"Labour behind the label/C.CAWDU demonstration outside Adidas

Date: 17 September Time: 9am – 10am
Location: Adidas Store, 415-419 Oxford St, London W1C 2PG

On 17 September there will be a global day of action called by global unions to demand an increase in the minimum wage in Cambodia from $100 to $177. As part of its solidarity actions on the day, the TUC will be supporting the demonstration being held by Labour behind the label and the Cambodian Apparel Workers Democratic Union (C.CAWDU) outside Adidas on Oxford st.

This demonstration will be calling on Adidas, H&M, Gap, Zara, Levi's, Puma, Walmart, and C&A to commit to an increase in the minimum wage in Cambodia. Please come along and show your support and spread the word through your networks.

For more information, please see:

https://www.facebook.com/events/691857020895533/?ref=22

The Public Cost of Poverty Wages

This cost is to the USA taxpayer but I suspect very much  that the problem is still the same over here across the pond. Lots of companies are "successful" but depend upon the tax payer to subsidise their poverty wages. They also don't pay tax on their profits but that is another (but very important) issue.

Next time you have a Big Mac think that you are not only paying good money to buy this burger but your taxes are also going to subsidise this very rich and profitable company and its payment of poverty wages to its staff. Something very wrong here I think?

Bringing Amazon to book: Protest over poverty pay & cheating the taxpayer

The GMB is planning a protest outside nine Amazon workplaces  tomorrow Wednesday 13th February.

Amazon pays many of its workers poverty wages and expects the tax payer to top them up with family credit and housing benefit. Yet at the same time Amazon has paid no tax in the UK for over 3 years on sales of £7 billion.

What a rip off. 

It goes without saying that Amazon doesn't believe in fundamental  human rights and refuses to recognise trade unions and collective bargaining.

Cartoon and hat tip Captain Swing

Metropolitan Housing Association: UNISON Protest tomorrow

Below is a press release from our branch about tomorrow's protest against poverty pay. As you can see from the screenshot to your left that Metropolitan "Vision and Values" includes "having care and concern for employees". 

How they can square these visions and values with paying staff poverty pay and taking on part time workers so they can cheat the taxpayer is beyond me?

"UNISON members in Metropolitan Housing Association (MHA) are planning to hold a mass lunchtime protest outside the organisation’s London headquarters at Cambridge House, in Wood Green on Friday 14th December.

The protest is in response to a lack of progress in current consultation meetings on proposed changes to the terms and conditions of staff members who are employed as Care and Support Workers.

Implementation of the new proposals by MHA will result in the reduction of staff salaries by 40%, the introduction of “flexible” contracts, and the implementation of pay rates below the London Living Wage.

MHA has already begun advertising for Support Workers at the new (low) pay scales. Anecdotal reports from within the organisation suggest attempts to recruit staff on these terms have been costly and inefficient, as posts have to be re-advertised 2 or 3 times.

UNISON Regional Organiser, Colin Inniss, stated: “it seems that Metropolitan Housing Association are determined to tarnish their fine reputation for high quality service delivery by paying a significant number of their dedicated Care and Support staff poverty pay. That is shameful”.

UNISON Housing Associations Branch Secretary, John Gray added: “It appears front line staff are being asked to pay the price for the lack of competent leadership within Metropolitan. Inflicting poverty pay on others while those at the top collect bumper wages reeks of hypocrisy and is unfair”.

Notes for Editors

1. Metropolitan manages 36,000 homes and provides housing and other services to 80,000 customers. In 2011/12 it made an operating surplus of £65.4M on a turnover of 244M.

2. Metropolitan’s London office is located at Cambridge House 109 Mayes Road Wood Green London N22 6UR.

3. Brian Johnson, formerly of Moat, has recently been appointed chief executive of Metropolitan.

4. UNISON’s Housing Association Branch represents 3,500 members in the Greater London Region and the South East.

The London Living Wage is designed to help people towards a minimum acceptable quality of life in our capital. It is calculated by the Greater London Authority and is currently £8.55.

Metropolitan Housing: Poverty Pay, Pay Offs and Predistribution

NO PROGRESS IN METROPOLITAN CONSULTATION MEETINGS

A series of cost-cutting proposals presented to UNISON by Metropolitan housing association have been firmly rejected by the union’s members.

Metropolitan are conducting a 90 day consultation on changes to the terms and conditions of its 887 staff who are employed as Care and Support workers. The proposals include the reduction of staff salaries by up to 40%; reducing the number of job roles from 44 to 4, introducing flexible contracts and reducing management and administration posts.

Controversially, a private consultant’s report presented to the Metropolitan Board in December 2011 recommended employing more low-paid, part time staff “who could supplement their income by claiming working tax credits”.

If implemented, the proposed salary cuts will slash the wages of front line staff to below that of the GLA’s recommended London Living Wage. Metropolitan’s 2011/12 Financial Statement revealed that the former chief executive, Bill Payne, received a record payout of £412,000 in 2011.

UNISON’s Housing Associations’ Branch Secretary, John Gray, commented: “The hypocrisy of Metropolitan’s position is absolutely staggering. It pays £412,000 to honour the employment contracts of a departing chief executive yet wants to rip up the contracts of hundreds of frontline staff in order to impose wage cuts of up to 40%”.

UNISON Regional Organiser, Colin Inniss stated: “our members at Metropolitan are very angry about this and rightly so. Unless the Board sees sense and reconsiders its proposals we are heading for a serious dispute.

For Further information or comment please contact:

UNISON Housing Associations Branch Secretary, John Gray j.gray2@unison.co.uk
UNISON Regional Organiser, Colin Inniss or C.Inniss@unison.co.uk

Notes for Editors

1. Metropolitan manages 36,000 homes and provides housing and other services to 80,000 customers. In 2011/12 it made an operating surplus of £65.4M on a turnover of £244M.

2. Brian Johnson, formerly of Moat, has recently been appointed chief executive of Metropolitan.

3. UNISON’s Housing Association Branch represents 3,500 members in the Greater London Region and the South East.

The London Living Wage is designed to help people towards a minimum acceptable quality of life in our capital. It is calculated by the Greater London Authority and is currently £8.30

(This is from branch press release. I brought this matter up at our West Ham GC meeting last night with our MP Lyn Brown)

"Two Tier Code will be mourned by some but welcomed by many" (pass the sic bag)

I have just come across a briefing by  - let us say a "progressive (sic?) international law firm" (mum's the word).

In this briefing these fine "progressives" were dribbling at what they believe to be the immediate prospect that this CONDEM government will soon abolish regulatory guidance on the "Two Tier Code" on out sourced public services.

This code was introduced after negotiations between the Labour Party and affiliated trade unions in 2004 (and improved in later agreements). 

The aim was to protect the terms and conditions of existing public sector staff who were transferred and that of new entrants.  Particularly with regard to pensions.  Now, the "code" was far from perfect but it did help protect against a race to the gutter by employers.  Protecting predominantly low paid female workers against "slash and burn" of their already basic terms.  It was especially important in trying to prevent employers taking on new staff on rubbish terms and no pension.

Let us be perfectly clear - if the "code" is abolished this will mean existing staff protections will be undermined and most new entrants will be on National minimum wage (NMW) with no sick pay, no pension and minimum holidays.  Effectively this means poverty labour.

Now, thinking about the title of this post - who who exactly are the "many" that these progressives think will "welcome" the demise of the "Two Tier Code"?  Will it be the hundreds of thousands of workers likely be actually affected who will be the ones jumping up and down in joy at the prospect of a whole £5.80 per hour (if over 22)?  Or will it be "progressive international lawyers" who charge more per hour on such contracts than the NMW pays in a week?  

I know, I know...it's a tough question to answer....

East End Poverty Wages for Vulnerable Agency staff

Trade union activists in an East End local authority invited me to interview permanent and agency employees about their comparative terms and conditions.

I have sent this information to UNISON Labour Link, which I hope they can use in their lobbying of the Government over support for the Temporary and Agency Workers (Equal Treatment) Bill on 22 February 2008. Check out the TULO and TUC websites on this key trade union issue. Identities have obviously been changed to protect sources.

I believe that the average London wage is now £45,000 per year?

Permanent Staff:
Worker 1: "Ron”
“Ron” has been directly employed by the local authority for the last 5 years. His grade is on JNC National Terms and conditions including London Weighting. He works 35 hours per week. He is paid Gross £9.92 per hour, £18,051 per year (£347 per week). If Ron is sick he can receive up to 6 months full pay and another 6 months at ½ pay. Ron is a member of the local government pension scheme. His employer also pays the equivalent of 14% of his salary on his behalf into the scheme. Ron has 32 days annual leave per year (not including Bank holidays).

Agency Staff:
Worker 2: “David”“
David” works alongside Ron and carries out exactly the same duties as the other permanent staff. They even wear the same uniform. David works also 35 hours a week. However, he is paid the National Minimum Wage Gross £5.52 per hour, £10, 046 per year (£193.20 per week). He gets no company sick pay, the basic statutory annual leave and no pension. David was born overseas. David sends money back home to his family who are dependant on his earnings. He has worked continually as an agency caretaker for the same local authority in East London for over 4 years. It is hard and difficult work cleaning housing estates. He rents a room in a shared house for £280 per month (£64 per week).

Worker 3: “Trevor”
"Trevor" has worked for the authority for over 3 years. He is on the same terms and conditions as David. Trevor suffers from cancer and has to have regular treatment. If he does not work he does not get paid. So he has to come into work even if he feels unwell or is suffering from the side effects of this treatment. He has to pay £350 per month rent for a room with shared facilities. He has noticed that agency staff can be sacked without notice or for no apparent reason. Also some people have not been paid for work after being told not to come back to a job. Caretaking is a difficult and demanding job; he has come across people taking drugs and been sworn and threatened by them. When he was in hospital due to his illness he did not even receive statutory sick pay.

Conclusion (aka "the bleeding obvious")
Ron gets paid substantially more (£8,005 pa) than his colleagues David and Trevor. He also has a decent pension and paid sick leave if he is ill. He has significantly more annual leave as well as other “big company” benefits.

Ron, David and Trevor have all done exactly the same job for the same “employer” for at least the last 3 years.

How can we tackle poverty in East London unless we make sure that all vulnerable staff are paid a “living wage”?

(Picture is of top Housing East London Caretaker and UNISON member “Rab” who was on NJC terms until he recently changed jobs. His previous employer was not part of this sample)