AMAZON on BBC1 Undercover

scooby088

RichardD1970 wrote: »

Really? It is common practice a quite a few big employers.

Would you really turn down the opportunity of a job because they want to test you for drugs which you say you don't take anyway?

What is your objection?

My objection is that in a way an employer is trying to dictate how you live your life outside of the workplace.

AP007

scooby088 wrote: »

My objection is that in a way an employer is trying to dictate how you live your life outside of the workplace.

You could still be drunk or under the influence of something illegal when n in work that's the problem. Insurance wont cover you.

RichardD1970

scooby088 wrote: »

My objection is that in a way an employer is trying to dictate how you live your life outside of the workplace.

But they are not. They are checking you when you're in work.

And quite frankly I am glad they do check, I would hate to think the bloke working next to me, operating potentially lethal equipment, could be high or drunk.

Dovah_diva

That programme, by Panorama, was by the far the most unfair and biased I have seen in a while.

Much was made of the fact that the staff work 10 hours shifts (actually 9 as they get an hour for lunch). It barely got a mention, however, that staff only work four days a week. So they work 36 hours a week. Hardly slave labour.

The sickness seemed harsh - but is obviously on a rolling basis - I hardly think permanent staff are only 'allowed' three incidents of sickness in their entire career at Amazon. All companies have to have a way of managing sickness.

Many companies penalise staff that are late. My son is docked 15 minutes pay if he is a minute late.

It is speed picking. Speed picking has been around for years. Hard work, but not complicated and you don't need to have to think for yourself. Targets are deliberately set high and it is generally accepted that few staff will meet them. I thought the manager was very reasonable.

No time for talking or socialising? It is a place of work, not a pub! Get on with your job.

Final point - interesting that all the former staff complaining were youngsters. Older men (my husband and Dad for example) are used to such work.

Hard work never killed anybody. Those that are calling it slave labour ought to be ashamed. You don't know the meaning of the phrase.

scooby088

AP007 wrote: »

You could still be drunk or under the influence of something illegal when n in work that's the problem. Insurance wont cover you.

But you could be high on something legal too, as opiates are used for pain relief. What allowances are made then if you disclose you are on strong pain relief medication?

Andy_L

scooby088 wrote: »

But you could be high on something legal too, as opiates are used for pain relief. What allowances are made then if you disclose you are on strong pain relief medication?

"Reasonable adjustments" as per the disability discrimination act if appropriate.

If you are unable to do your job safely/effectively because of the painkillers you are on should you really be at work?

scooby088

Andy_L wrote: »

"Reasonable adjustments" as per the disability discrimination act if appropriate.

If you are unable to do your job safely/effectively because of the painkillers you are on should you really be at work?

Why wouldn't you be at work? I only highlighted the fact about strong painkillers. I work with a person who regularily takes 600mg of tramadol and he drives cars for a living not on the open road but in an environment where customers and fellow workers could be hit by him, the management know he takes these strong painkillers and have made no reasonable adjustments for him although he hasn't asked for any.

John1993_2

RichardD1970 wrote: »

Being even 2 minutes late can have a big impact on production, I have to be ready to work on my section at the start time, not strolling into the factory, then getting changed and set up for the shift, but actually ready to start working.

This sort of complaint makes no sense at all to me. As I've mentioned previously, I used to have to start work at 6:40 in the morning. On day 1 I was told to never, ever be late, which meant to be sitting there, computer on, at 06:40, ready to work.

Not strolling in with a coffee, not coming in the door downstairs, not in the coat room, but at the desk, ready to go.

So I was. Every day, for six years.

How can people think that being ready to work at the start of your shift is unfair?

RichardD1970

Dovah_diva wrote: »

The sickness seemed harsh - but is obviously on a rolling basis - I hardly think permanent staff are only 'allowed' three incidents of sickness in their entire career at Amazon. All companies have to have a way of managing sickness.

Don't think it was that harsh really, it is on a 3 month rolling basis, so it would mean you being late 6 times or 3 instances of sickness in a 3 month period, which in any organisation is excessive. For the "worker" in the program to have been late 3 times in 7 weeks just goes to show his attitude to work. And how can you not know you are late, again shows a totally lackadaisical approach.

scooby088 wrote: »

Why wouldn't you be at work? I only highlighted the fact about strong painkillers. I work with a person who regularily takes 600mg of tramadol and he drives cars for a living not on the open road but in an environment where customers and fellow workers could be hit by him, the management know he takes these strong painkillers and have made no reasonable adjustments for him although he hasn't asked for any.

But we're not talking about prescription drugs, are we. We're taking about illegal drugs. Which by their very purpose are taken to change your mental state.

He might not need any adjustments. Maybe he isn't effected by the side effects to an extent that he can't do his job safely. Drug side effects don't effect everyone the same, which is why on the leaflet it says "may cause", and list possible side effects.

scooby088

RichardD1970 wrote: »

Don't think it was that harsh really, it is on a 3 month rolling basis, so it would mean you being late 6 times or 3 instances of sickness in a 3 month period, which in any organisation is excessive. For the "worker" in the program to have been late 3 times in 7 weeks just goes to show his attitude to work. And how can you not know you are late, again shows a totally lackadaisical approach.



But we're not talking about prescription drugs, are we. We're taking about illegal drugs. Which by their very purpose are taken to change your mental state.

He might not need any adjustments. Maybe he isn't effected by the side effects to an extent that he can't do his job safely. Drug side effects don't effect everyone the same, which is why on the leaflet it says "may cause", and list possible side effects.

So does the use of illegal drugs effect everyone the same? There are just as many harmful legal drugs being taken that can change the mental state of the person taking them. Just because they come with a warning sheet in the packaging doesn't mean they are any less harmful to the person using them or their co workers.