Amazon internal chat app that censored talk of unions and ethics may 'never launch at all' Amazon allegedly planned an internal messaging app that filtered words like "union," "pay rise," and "ethics," alongside challenging and offensive terms, but after public disclosure of the project, the biz told The Register the software has not been approved and may never be deployed. Citing internal Amazon documents, The …
Not sure why Amazon is hanging this on a custom internal chat app. My (Fortune 500) employer recently announced that we can now enable self-censoring in Slack.
The bot will make suggestions if people use words that are deemed problematic by the company, like "dummy value", "brown bag lunch", "man-hours", "soft skills", and "he".
censorship at all. that's just stupid.
WORSE if you try to violate the law with it (i.e. blocking attempts to unionize). That is VERY illegal inside the USA. Proving the violation of the law, on the other hand, may be difficult...
It's quite literally a VERY old law that an employer can not punish employees nor in any way block the establishment of a labor union within the company. The ONLY thing they can do is offer incentives like higher wages lor better conditions to COMPETE with the unions. Censorship would most likely qualify as a violation of the law in this context. But then again, social media IN GENERAL needs to be SERIOUSLY PUNISHED for its censorship efforts (in general).
I look forward to seeing some SERIOUS consequences for Amazon over this. Unfortunately it will probably mean price increases for consumers.
Amazon can do anything it wants in the USA. Remember that money = power and now Amazon has so much money they are FAR more powerful than the government. If really pushed, they will just lock the unionized warehouse and move next door. Yes it's against the law, but who cares; Amazon is now above the law. Remember in the USA, wealth equals absolute power, well above any government.
Possibly not so much. Governments in democracies have to publish budget allocations and get votes through. Actual amount of cash isn't the same as the power to use it. Especially when companies can use their cash to buy politicians' votes promote their wishes.
Without commenting on the other terms, or whether they should be deemed problematic, I'm wondering why 'soft skills' is in that list.
Although https://www.ncda.org/aws/NCDA/pt/sd/news_article/278124/_PARENT/CC_layout_details/false I guess answers that.
I can only facepalm. Develop your soft skills everybody, they'll help you in your career and your social life.
If you're making plans you don't do it somewhere the opposition can read them. And Amazon is most definitely the "opposition" when it comes to employees wanting to unionize.
They might be doing them a favor by forcing them to use another method that Amazon can't spy on.
It's a lot easier to organise inside the workplace than it is outside. That's one of the reasons that it has been a protected act for many decades.
Clearly there is a risk with a company like Amazon. At the same time, this kind of action exemplifies exactly the need for a union in the first place.
>China can be a source of inspiration.
From another ElReg article today:-
"Huawei is owned by Huawei Investment & Holding Co Ltd, which is itself owned by two lots of shareholders, including Ren (0.84 percent of the company) and the Union of Huawei Investment & Holding Company (comprised of employees that hold 99.16 percent of the share capital)."
That's probably why we in "the West" fear this company so much. Its bad enough that its Chinese and successful but being employee owned? That's really beyond the pale....it might invite imitation. (As we all know, we work and live "to make the payments"!)
I was going to suggest that they could reverse the old joke, an use Essex as a replacement for ethics but, of course, the sex part of Essex is probably already in the filtration system. Likewise, as we all know here, not only is there a lot of collateral damage from word filters from the outset, but people adapt words that are not filtered and "weaponize" them. Dorthy is a perfectly normal name that can be used as an insult by some. Maybe all those Jeffs at Amazon need to just Bezos Off and stop and thinking about using amazon technology to prime the workers?
This is not just a staff-management facing system. Inevitably some or all of the banned list will be, in fact very quickly has been , made public.
At which point all those banned words turn into a handy list of all the egregious things the company are doing.
What on social media is called a "self own".
The article and comments have mostly focused on the workers' rights issues with this system, which is the most important aspect, but when I read the list of banned terms, I couldn't help but think of a less important technical issue. Specifically, if they ever implemented this and blocked on that list of words, their false positive rate would be so bad that nobody could practically use it. So many typical turns of phrase could set off those filters.
Some examples:
"Please [pay] close attention to the [raised] floor to avoid interfering with the work going on there."
"The [rate] of warnings from the [robots] in area 3 means we'll need to call an engineer to fix them."
Yes, if they built it, it would be concerning and unfair (oh no, another keyword), but it would also be completely broken.
"Boss, where is the restroom???" <Message Blocked>
"Anyone, where can I find the toilet?" <Message Blocked>
"Please, I need to use the Loo! Where do I find it? Do I need to raise this as an issue? <Message Blocked>
"Screw you all, I'm just going to piss all over the Electrical Products!" <Message Blocked>
"Dear Everyone, there seems to have been a leak or spillage in the area of the electrical products. If anyone knows anything about this, please let me know ASAP. The Boss" <Message Allowed>
This is Amazon warehouses, so the staff are expected to piss in a bottle rather than waste time traipsing to and from a toilet. That might not be official policy, but there are reports of staff feeling compelled to do this as toilet breaks can earn you a rebuke from your manager.
That said, I had a part-time job at a bank's cheque processing centre while I was a student. It was written into the contract that you could only take one toilet break per shift outside of your lunch break and it could not take more than five minutes. Factor in the distance to the toilets, and it was nigh in impossible to take a break in that time. A particularly petty manager loved to enforce this rule as well ...
It's very revealing how the words they wanted to ban say rather a lot about Amazon and the unpleasant truth its executives don't want the outside world to hear. The only thing that surprised me was that "piss in a bottle" wasn't on the list.
Indeed. Or - and I know this will be a shock - they could consider a business model with conditions that might make people want to work there other than 'because they need to eat'.
Is there something deep in the human psyche that makes some people want to live in a serfs and overlord world, or is it just something you get along with your MBA?
From the NLRB's website we can see the kind of thing Amazon deems inappropriate:
The National Labor Relations Board is an independent federal agency that protects the rights of private sector employees to join together, with or without a union, to improve their wages and working conditions.
Federal law gives you the right to form, join or assist a union; choose representatives to bargain with your employer on your behalf; act together with other employees for your benefit and protection; and choose not to engage in any of these protected activities.
The law we enforce gives employees the right to act together to try to improve their pay and working conditions, with or without a union.
The National Labor Relations Act forbids employers from interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of their rights.
So with its latest outburst Amazon has still not disabused anyone of the notion that it is a poisonous viper's nest.
Absolutely should no employee be allowed to carry out mass subordination using company property on company time. The arrogance of some people leaves a lot to be desired.
If a handful of self righteous trouble makers seek to cause trouble then they should do so out of work using their own capital expenditure.
It's like a thief expecting to come in and use the C&C machine to duplicate a set of keys so they can later rob the joint.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
