back to article Amazon turns Victorian industrialist with $2bn building project to house workers near new headquarters

In a striking parallel to model villages created by Victorian industrialists for their workers, Amazon on Wednesday announced it would spend $2bn building affordable housing near its three new headquarters. The e-commerce giant has said it will build more than 20,000 homes “in communities it calls home” – Arlington in Virginia …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    FAIL

    Blake

    The phrase "dark Satanic mills" comes to mind."

    Also note that they are doing nothing for their warehouse workers, just the HQs.

    1. AMBxx Silver badge
      Big Brother

      Re: Blake

      I can imagine each house having an Amazon Echo thingy in every room. No off switch of course.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Blake

      Strewn with cowpats from DEVILS OWN SATANIC HEEEEEERD!

  2. J.G.Harston Silver badge

    Call me cynical, but of course this reduces Amazon's pre-tax profits, and consequently reduces the taxes on those profits.

    1. Snake Silver badge

      Taxes

      But they'd already paying very little.

      Oh. This way they'll actually get a refund out of everyone else's pocket. My bad. Sorry.

  3. Sparkus

    I owe my soul to the company store.....

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfp2O9ADwGk

  4. Ashto5

    Scary

    Just scary

    I will provide a home for you as long as you work for me, but I will pay you very little as I provide a home for you, of course you can leave and be homeless

    Is that not a type of slavery

    USA is a worrying place

    1. NeilPost

      Re: Scary

      Combine warehouse and living = Amazon Workhouse?!

      1. Ashto5

        Re: Scary

        Could be described as servants quarters maybe ?

        America formed on the basis of breaking away from a monarchy, now run by another type of monarchy

        Ya couldn’t make this stuff up

    2. HausWolf

      Re: Scary

      Company scrip, you'll get paid via direct deposit to your Amazon account. Get hurt, cause trouble or say something Alexa finds disturbing (Union) and out the door you go, broke and homeless.

    3. HereIAmJH Silver badge

      Re: Scary

      Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see anything in the article that linked the homes to employment. They are just homes being built in areas where Amazon is opening new offices.

      If you have to be an Amazon employee to live in these new homes, then it's problematic. It's bad enough in America that you have to make career decisions based on employer 'supplied' health insurance. I can't imagine having to consider a job search and home search at the same time.

      OTOH, if Amazon went in and said 'our analysis of the demographics surrounding our headquarters show a lack of affordable housing, and we can do something about that.' I don't see a problem, even if they earn a profit from rentals, if it's open market housing.

      1. 2Fat2Bald

        Re: Scary

        I would point out that for most people the fact is that if you lose your job you lose your home because you can no longer afford to pay rent or mortgage (as per) on it. Arguably, the mechanism is a little different here but the practical effect much the same.

        The only difference is that you can change employers without moving whereas with this deal you can't. Although, again, much of the time people relocate for work anyway... so. there's that.

  5. Andy 73 Silver badge

    Quite in Favour

    The Cadbury development dramatically improved worker's housing, and is still used as an example of progressive and socially aware architecture.

    Given that there is a death spiral of housing costs and worker pay in high-tech communities in America, it seems quite a good idea to take the price of putting a roof over your head out of the equation. Optimistically, we could even see innovation in modern homes and communities.

    Ultimately, though the article tries to paint this as an example of Victorian-style oppression, workers have a choice to go there or not. People willingly moved to the new developments like Cadburys (and ultimately formed major cities in the UK) because it was a damn sight better than living in a rural hovel.

    1. AMBxx Silver badge
      Big Brother

      Re: Quite in Favour

      The developments in England are still great places to live. Not just Bournville, there's Port Sunlight (soap) and much of North York (more chocolate).

      Terry's of York also paid more for their cocoa to help development overseas.

      I'm not convinced that Amazon are being benevolent though.

      1. MJI Silver badge

        Re: Quite in Favour

        Then there are the railway towns. Lots of decent accomodation for their workers. And jobs for life. Free health care pre NHS in fact was one of the thoughts behind it.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Quite in Favour

          "Free health care pre NHS in fact was one of the thoughts behind it."

          According to something I saw a few days ago about Swindon, it was more about appearance than genuine benevolence. Might have been the Swindon episode of The Architecture The Railways Built, not sure:

          https://yesterday.uktv.co.uk/shows/the-architecture-the-railways-built/

          Anyway, the houses closest to the station etc were nicely prettified to impress travellers and potential workers. Away from the through routes, houses were much more routine.

          And much of the health facilities were built initially because of the large number of casualties in the railway works.

          I think the Quaker-derived places (Bournville, Port Sunlight, York) were a better example of doing the right thing for the right reasons.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Quite in Favour

      The Cadbury development dramatically improved worker's housing, and is still used as an example of progressive and socially aware architecture

      I don't think you can compare what Amazon are doing in the US with the Cadburys development of Bournville in Birmingham. The Cadbury family were devout Quakers who had the absolutely crazy idea that they had some moral obligation to look after the workers who created their wealth. I haven't lived in Birmingham for around 20 years, but even in the late 20th century the area and housing around the Cadbury factory, being so relatively spacious and green, was one of the nicest in the whole city.

      The only higher power the owner of Amazon worships is Mamon, so I don't think people will be saying the same thing about Amazon housing today, let alone in 100 years time.

      1. Martin an gof Silver badge

        Re: Quite in Favour

        I don't think you can compare what Amazon are doing in the US with the Cadburys development of Bournville in Birmingham

        Time will tell, but I think you are right. However, the article did seem to compare them, and not in a positive manner and certainly in the case of places like Bournville the anti social housing bias in the article needs to be challenged.

        M.

    3. Cliffwilliams44 Silver badge

      Re: Quite in Favour

      "Given that there is a death spiral of housing costs and worker pay in high-tech communities in America"

      And this is an American Capitalist problem? No, it is not.

      In the Bay Area/Silicon Valley or in the Seattle area in order to build any kind of housing you have to jump through a myriad of government regulations that jacks up construction costs so high it is nearly impossible to build any reasonable affordable housing. Therefor the existing decades if not century old homes that are basically 2 bedroom bung-aloes sell for close to $1M. Add to this these states fake environmental policies that are designed to trap people inside their cites and the price just rises.

      1. AMBxx Silver badge

        Re: Quite in Favour

        I believe Austin, Texas is very welcoming.

        Also a great place for a night out.

    4. Fred Dibnah

      Re: Rural hovel

      The accommodation in industrial cities was, in many cases, worse than in rural areas. Originally people were generally able to live off the land without having to work for anyone else, but after Enclosure (essentially the landowners appropriating common land with the backing of the authorities) they were forced into cities where the only way to survive was to become a wage slave to an employer.

      And so here we are today.

      1. Peter2 Silver badge

        Re: Rural hovel

        In terms of rural vs industrial areas, a rural area before industrialisation was effectively the wealthy industrial area. After machinery was knocking out huge quantities at low prices rural areas became pretty untenable for traditional industries.

        Too be fair enclosure has to be put in full context of the time, which was the Napoleonic war, which made the later ww1 look like a minor border skirmish. Food imports were a bit iffy, and the common lands were not generating anything like as much food as they could have done. Sufficient for the local houses? Sure.

        But if you were living in a city at the time needing to be fed from the non existent surpluses off of that land then you'd have been engaging in the widespread food riots of the era which have otherwise neatly been airbrushed out of the history books. Enclosing the land did increase the food output and so was a success from that point of view, but obviously then meant that the locals had to buy the food instead of being able to grow their own and sell the surpluses at a huge profit.

        Accommodation has always been a bit difficult; the early cities had an awful lot of slums. On the other hand, the population growth in the 19th century was a little nuts and couldn't reasonably have been expected at the time from historical patterns.

    5. meadowlark

      Re: Quite in Favour

      The other thing about Cadburys is that they paid decent wages to their employees and provided other benefits such as sick pay and cheap nourishing meals at lunch time. The company was known as a 'factory in a garden' because they moved from Birmingham city centre to a lush rural area. Being Quakers, the family felt obliged to treat their workers with respect and not to exploit them for as much profit as possible. Strangely, two other chocolate and confectionary makers were also run by Quaker families......Frys and the Rowntrees.

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Quite in Favour

      Difference is that John Cadbury was a Friend. Bezos on the other hand may have heard of morals, once, in passing.

  6. Cliffwilliams44 Silver badge

    And do any of you think the coming quasi-Socialist administration will make this any better? Company housing? Now replaced with Government housing! Forcibly constructed in suburban areas in order to infiltrate the dependent classes into area currently not controlled by the Left.

    1. ratfox
      Go

      "quasi-Socialist"

      Hey, if you don't like the government elected by your fellow citizens, you're free to fuck off.

    2. tiggity Silver badge

      quasi socialist?

      To citizens of most European countries Biden still looks right wing, just less so than some other politicians.

    3. Roland6 Silver badge

      >Forcibly constructed in suburban areas in order to infiltrate the dependent classes into area currently not controlled by the Left.

      That isn't a bad policy, scientific evidence on realworld social networking (ie. not Facebook et al) show that such arrangements are mutually beneficial: at the most basic level, the affluent householder gain a local supply of gardeners, cleaners, etc. and those less well off get jobs and opportunities and a level of living not possible from just living on welfare.

      As for whether this enhances the control of "the left" is an open question, however, from the UK's playing around with constituency boundaries, it would seem this approach actually reduces the number of area's controlled by "the left"...

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Too much profit

    All very well, but...

    When I read about financially rich companies and their execs giving away zillions or on philanthropic projects like this, it strikes me they either overcharged for their goods/services and/or staff underpaid.

    I guess at least they are attempting to do something positive.

  8. Howard Sway Silver badge

    These are houses for staff who work at the headquarters

    Think about that : these are mostly the more senior management type employees, plus the minions that serve them. If more senior staff can't afford housing then the problem has really got out of hand. No doubt the housing will come complete with Amazon autonomous vehicle delivery services and "free" Amazon Prime services, Amazon supermarkets and street corner Alexas.

    In the warehouses, it will be easier to build "sleep pods" for the unfortunates that end up having to "live" there. And if you spend more than seven minutes in the toilet in an hour, you won't just lose your job. You'll lose your home.

  9. charlieboywoof
    Unhappy

    In Other Words

    keep them corporate slaves

  10. Amentheist

    What level of indoctrination does it take for someone to work (amazon's hours and burnouts) and live at the same locale. Maybe I'm jaded but are there people who really love their job so much?

    1. Lars Silver badge
      WTF?

      "are there people who really love their job so much?"

      Perhaps not, but there are a hell of a lot of people who need a job and want one too, and living in a card box, American style, is not any better either.

  11. malcontent

    New Lanark

    Perhaps David Dale's New Lanark project (with later input from Robert Owen) from 1786 is the first UK example of a company town.

    1. Martin an gof Silver badge

      Re: New Lanark

      Great day out now - the museum is rather good, plenty to do and see.

      Erm... When it reopens.

      M.

  12. W@ldo

    Next comes the employee cryptocurrency, only valid at the company store

    Yes, those that don't study history are destined to repeat history. This all has played out many times as our civilizations emerged. It sounds really good labeled as affordable housing--but, they really are not targeting affordable housing to those that need it most. If you are on the lowest tier of employees you either live in poverty or work multiple gigs to make ends meet.

    Bezos could do something epic from his vantage point--take on some of the social problems that tech followers prominently tout on their facebook/twitter feeds. Walk the talk and solve some problems. You'll still be rich, and probably get richer.

    1. Mast1

      Re: Next comes the employee cryptocurrency, only valid at the company store

      Who needs the "crypto" aspect ?

      It was called "scrip money". Beloved of 19th century industrialists: yup, only redeemable in the company store, which used marked-up prices anyway.

      Of course any similarity between this and 21st century UK rail refund vouchers, not redeemable online, but only at a staffed ticket office (where a higher set of prices are shown) is purely illusory.........

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Cool. So Judge Dredd style mega buildings are on the way then.

    We really are turning into a cyberpunk style dystopia but with none of the sweet body augmentations.

    When can I have 20 red eyes, comically massive arms and a chrome bellend...that's all that matters.

  14. nojava

    Indentured Servitude ?

    Amazon a new Warlord!

  15. HellDeskJockey

    It's OK

    Because he's a Liberal. It has to be true, I read it in the Washington Post.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: It's OK

      And the Washington Post is owned by...?

      (I assume that was your point, but just spelling it out for anyone who doesn't know!)

  16. codejunky Silver badge

    Eh?

    Inequality waaaa. Then the rich jump through the hoops of building housing to provide for the much poorer and this is bad? I thought wealth transfer was to be a good thing? Or is that only when the government take a pound and give a penny (or a dollar to give a cent)? And yes Amazon could pay its staff more but it would be stupid to do so and no amount will ever be enough.

  17. John Gamble

    The 21st Century Version of Pullman

    Looking forward to the rent increase coupled with the pay cut.

    Pullman, Illinois

  18. JimC

    You've just had a demonstration in Washington

    Of where current levels of inequality are heading. You surely don't think all that anger is just about the election? Dramatic increase of inequality as a result of the greed of the executive class is approaching levels that have resulted in revolutions. Better wise up or there'll be silicone Valley execs hanging from lampposts.

  19. Chippie

    Bournville Neighbour...

    The Victorian's were lucky people, they got Sundays off ;-) One hopes Mr Bezos learns from history... :-) IF you were really lucky you also got free education....now woudn't that be a great thing.............

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like