Amazon warehouse workers 'make history' with first official UK strike Some Brits at least have never been afraid to strike – and the wave of industrial action hitting various sectors over the crushing cost of living has found its way over to Amazon for the first time in the UK. The strike among workers at a Coventry warehouse today stems from a 50p-an-hour pay rise (5 percent) to £10.50 ($12.92 …
We have some of the most repressive union regulations in the free world, and our the number of days lost to strike action is generally on the low side compared to many other countries (looks across the Channel...)
The reason there are so many strikes at the moment is that people are fed up with a decade of below-inflation wage increases and the already rich giving themselves massive pay rises while preaching constraint.
Also tax thresholds have not been adjusted for inflation, so kind of a double whammy.
Yerrrwot????
2010 personal allowance £6,475
2020 personal allowance £12,500
That's *DOUBLED* in ten years. That's 7% per year consistently every year.
Over the same 10-year period inflation was a total of 21%, 2% per year.
The personal allowance has outpaced inflation by 3.5-fold.
I did find that amusing too.
But it's a long story that you have never managed to "hold but the wrong way".
You represent the last (I hope) class society in Europe, and so damned stupidly divided into a two party country with a one party government.
A system you find only in countries like North Korea, China and some similar.
I was going to add the USA but, as odd as it is, that "other house" can actually have some power witch is not the case in Britain. (even if that power is mostly used just for obstruction)
In a two party system trade unions are seen as enemies, by default, as in a two party system there can be nothing but either right or left.
And there you go, around and around and never anywhere.
In the more intelligent world, trade unions are integrated into the system in what is often called a tripartite arrangement.
Tripartite agreements are an important component in practical labor law, since they cover not only wages, but also issues such as policies on benefits, vacation, work hours and worker safety.
Your problem is rather that the trade unions are not supported as they should, and they strike only when they are really totally pissed off by government policy.
A good trade union, in a decent society, is more like a nagging wife, or husband, having important things to say every now and then, than one that explodes once in ten years or so only.
Strikers will always be called militant if they don't shut up, while in fact it's always the government that acts in a militant way.
And the rhetoric will always be the same, the poor kid who cannot go to school and similar.
This came to my mind as I remeber a strike as a kid and how we loved that it took almost half the day to walk to school.
From the view of a Nordic, Britain is like a closed circus, a zoo, and all that happens and how, we know in advance, as we have seen it before.
And then there is that class society language we don't have that strongly anywhere else, where guys like Boris and Mogg will be considered more relivable experienced and intelligent than for instance a guy like Mike Lynch.
Eventually you will have to choose and take facts and the reality more seriously.
From the POV of a Brit that agrees with your views entirely, one can only attempt to fight the misinformation with fact. The last 13 years a series of escalating disasters and shift towards insular thinking and hopelessly short-term soundbites and policies that do nothing for average joe or the UK. I also fervently believe that I would much rather see both us and our allies doing well; not one economy doing well over another. Inequality breeds all manner of problems.
I am a massive advocate of reform away from the two-party system to require co-operation in government. Sure, this makes some decision making slower (see recent rather important debates in Germany) but it also accounts for representing a wide range of views.
I'm definitely a leftist by most current definitions, but there are policies attributed to the left that I absolutely abhor. (Resistance to developing Nuclear power at scale; and defence policies amongst other examples, and this unhealthy obsession with labelling people despite the fact that the labels themselves are a source of problems).
Some might say that I am therefore, a centrist. There isn't a centrist option on our ballot papers here in Blighty. And again, electoral reform to something like MMPR is pretty much the only way to put one there. Notably, our trade unions (and even the Labour Party conference) have raised motions in favour of reform. So, the priority now is to get the Tories out, and then hold Labour to the reform agenda. Bring it on.
Against a backdrop of a rising proportion of retired population that want their 5% year-on-year this is a challenging proposition. But there is evidence that the traditional cycle of people getting older swinging more Tory is beginning to break. After all, it's obvious that carrying on as we are is a spiral of decline. Now only to persuade the rest.
It doesn't help that the PM is one of the richest people in the country.
That doesn't mean he's completely oblivious and ignorant to how most people live, but his actions so far say that he very much is so.
So now it's like rubbing salt into the wound. Only it's not even preventing infection in this analogy.
Given the proportion of strikers, then it is not surprising others will not cross the picket line as they will need to run 20% faster to compensate. I'm sure management has an emergency cupboard full of cattle prods to keep things moving efficiently - oh wait, just like any other day I suppose.
Well, next time Amazon can hire the staff in-scope of IR35 and that means they won't have right to unionise and strike.
After all the IR35 changes were timed with Brexit, exactly to give these big corporations flexibility when it comes to fire and rehire and protect their bottom line from strikes.
NEDs are just a way to avoid being accused of corruption. It requires a bit of trust - the minister that does the deed cannot get any compensation upfront and often has to wait years until the end of their term and any relevant notices.
This is actually for the poorer ministers. The wealthier ones just have offshore foundations and trusts (not in their name of course) where company makes a donation (through some middleman organisation to avoid being traced).
As for whether the strike would catch on in other Amazon UK locations, she said: "Coventry might be the start of it but it won't be the finish. We think people are watching on. We know there are workers at other centers that feel exactly the same and they are just waiting to see what happens."
That is not something in your favour. If Amazon gives in they will then suffer from the other locations. That might be a point you dont want to draw attention to.
@AC
"Can't work out if you're ignorant of the solidarity they're looking to achieve or just being deliberately obtuse."
I was simply saying it might not be wise to point out other locations are taking a wait and see approach while trying to negotiate for improvements. If the other places were ready to strike then drawing attention to greater intended disruption would strengthen your hand, but if the others are taking a 'wait and see' approach Amazon might just kick out these upstarts from a union they dont recognise as an example to others.
There are pro's and cons of ordering or not ordering from Amazon
Amazon - con
- far greater risk of your package being stolen from your doorstep if it is in an Amazon box..
- No or very little risk of said item being delivered (or not) by Hermes/Evri
Other store con
- Highly likely that the package will possibly be delivered (or not) by Hermes/Evri
Other store pro
- less likely for the package to be stolen from doorstep because it is NOT in an amazon box.
If you are willing to wait, just order directly from China. It's going to be much cheaper. Otherwise that "extra £1" just lands in the pocket of people in the middle who typically don't do any work.
You are a bit deluded if you think the workers on the floor will see that money.
Why directly from China? Because these tradesmen don't improve our economy, they don't create any value. So if they lose business, maybe they'll start doing something useful.
Like maybe bringing manufacturing back to the UK.
There have beed several reports of people ordering high value items like iPhones and MacBooks from Amazon only to find the parcel from Amazon contained dogwood or, in one case a box of cornflakes*. I realise that this implies stealing by a very small number of Amazon 'fulfilment' staff, but I wonder whether there would be les of this is they were paid a decent, living, wage?
* I don't know whether they were Kellogs or not, but the delivery driver advised the recipient that the pack felt rather light for a MacBook, and videoed her opening it. She got her money back quickly. The guy whose iPhone turned out to be dog food (same weight) had to get in touch with a national consumer protection radio show before he got any useful response from Amazon.
"I realise that this implies stealing by a very small number of Amazon 'fulfilment' staff, but I wonder whether there would be les of this is they were paid a decent, living, wage?"
I doubt it. They aint stealing high value luxury items to eat. Its either to flog because they are criminal scum or for themselves/friends. Also the words 'decent, living' dont have any meaning when it comes to wage. Its not a measurable item just some fluffy idea like 'fair'. One that keeps getting inflated until more people are put out of work and automation is cheaper.
This post has been deleted by its author
Many years ago I worked in the back office of a industrial electronics retailer with large warehouses here in the UK.
The warehouse staff were more or less assumed to be criminals the way they were treated. Metal detectors on the entrances and wand searches too.
I didnt stick long with that contract. But I'd be surprised if anyone else is any better.
"I realise that this implies stealing by a very small number of Amazon 'fulfilment' staff, but I wonder whether there would be les of this is they were paid a decent, living, wage?"
Actually, I doubt that's what happened. Among other things, the fulfillment staff are recorded in a number of ways so if you stole a laptop that you packed, they could probably find you. I've seen tactics such as shipping the wrong thing used more often by dodgy sellers who purport to sell an item and ship something to the buyer so that they have a longer time to run with the money before the buyer realizes they didn't get what they ordered. It's possible the computer was bought from a third-party seller who shipped using Amazon instead. Either is possible, but the latter makes more sense to me.
But it's 20% of the workforce. If it is all zero hours stuff that's more hours for the non-unionised staff to pick up.
Apart from those that refused to cross the picket line of course. Those can legally be sacked on day 1. The union staff have six weeks of legal protection before they get their P45s, if they haven't got the hint by then.
I'm not saying it's right, but that is the legal reality.
I read that the US loses more days labour (or possibly labor) to strike action per head of population than any other nation on the planet. Furthermore the UK is well down that chart. So what exactly was the point of that v stupid throwaway line about Brits not being afraid to strike?
After all this is, as you've pointed out, the first strike among Amazon employees in the UK. So the UK is behind on that score too.
a history of industrial action that the nation will not soon forget
I wouldn't be so sure these days. For most of these services, people have alternatives. For example, 40 years ago a national train strike meant national headlines about how people couldn't get to work. Today it just means "Meh, Hey Boss I'm working from home on Wednesday".
My interpretation is that the UK strikes of 30+ years ago is essentially propaganda.
We have the media constantly over stating what it was like in the 70's and 80's, the Tories using it every time, and the people believe it. As others have said, the reality is that the UK is low down in the number of days lost due to strikes.
I'm all in favour of industrial action where necessary. Indeed I've been a union rep in the past, however...
Sometimes I despair of trade unions. 45% is the kind of pay demand that got the unions a bad name in the seventies. They will no doubt try to reason that this is to make up for years of below inflation rises, but there are two arguments against that. Firstly that with inflation running at the low level it has been until recently that's an awfully lot of years payrises to make up for and of course a worker who accepted their current salary say a year ago does not reasonably qualify for a backdated raise for ten years of missed raises. But the more important response to such claims is that they are the union in this case, so they have accepted those previous sub-inflation raises on behalf of their members (that's how collective bargaining works). As such they must accept some of the responsibility for theur members current pay rate.
What they really have to consider is the public perception of all this. Ask for a 45% raise and you're going to make trade unions as a whole look unreasonable and your own members look greedy. Surely they must realise that three media will report this action being primarily about pay, no matter what other issues are on the table? As such I feel it is better to always keep discussions and action about pay separate from those about terms and conditions. After all one of the things that is making rail workers negotiations so hard at the moment is that while that dispute is about all sorts of things the government is portraying it as being about pay and greed* and most of the media have fallen for that hook line and sinker. So the public at large understand the rail workers to be striking over pay.
*According to our government and their friends in the press greed is a bad thing when exhibited by employees, but a very, very good thing when exhibited by employees. Employee wants a 10% rise? They are greedy and holding the company to ransom. CEO gets a 50% rise and AA huge bonus? That's just an indication of what a great job the CEO does.
In negotiating, you have to start somewhere which is reasonable. If I went to my boss and said I wanted ten times my salary, I'm less likely to get an actual raise than if I went there and asked for something smaller. Asking for the moon makes you sound like you don't take the negotiation seriously, they can't counteroffer anything close to what you said, and it can also make the other party hate you and want to deny you things. Think about your reaction in a market (one where haggling is still common) between someone whose opening price seems a little high and someone who is charging a laptop's price for a cheap object. Which seller would you talk to?
I'm speaking in general here about tactics. I can't comment on how reasonable the requests are because I've never lived in the UK. Wage and salary levels vary a lot by country and I don't have a good understanding of what's normal. Whenever I see direct comparisons of salaries across countries, they look very unbalanced, but a lot of data can be hidden when only one value is reported because information about prices, taxes, or what services are government-provided and at what cost is missing from that straightforward comparison.
the government is portraying it as being about pay and greed
That's because, for the rail workers, it is.
The big sticking point isn't the pay, it's that they are still insisting on maintaining working practices that date from the days when there was little automation, and everything was much more manual. The result is that the network is overmanned, and expensive. If they would accept modern working practices they could have a much larger pay rise.
There was a big European rail conference last year, just as the strikes kicked off. The hottest topic in all the discussions was automation, aka driverless trains. The unions are literally striking their members out of a job.
The sad part is that people have been too accepting of below inflation pay rises, if they get one at all. That is not really their fault as their environment of anti-union, they don't deserve a pay rise, it cannot be afforded (lie), we need to work harder has psychologically oppressed them to the point of near stockholm syndrome.
Amazon pay 50p greater than the minimum wage, which is not a lot for 10 hour working day.
There has been numerous fire and rehire events, and although the Tories make the right noises - nothing happens.
People have had enough.
@AC
"Amazon pay 50p greater than the minimum wage, which is not a lot for 10 hour working day."
Is it a bad thing to pay 50p more than the minimum wage? Or even to pay the minimum wage? In of itself it is (in theory) the minimum barrier to hiring someone. Offering the wage in exchange for someone who values their time and effort at that amount. If its too low people wont work there. If its too high there is no shortage of workers and can even use things like zero hour contracts.
@Dave@Home
"When the minimum wage means that people need help from the state to meet basic living costs (via UC for example) then it becomes obvious the benefits system is subsidising employers."
Employers or employees? Increase the minimum wage and you have more people out of work and so the person is not just on benefits but entirely dependent on just benefits.
There was an interesting comparison a while ago when people argued for a living wage of £12 or something. It turned out the minimum wage actually was the living wage except for tax taking it off them.
“Employees are also offered comprehensive benefits that are worth thousands more – including private medical insurance”
We’re not the US, we have a half decent health service - I’m sure if the choice was pay rise or keep health insurance, they’d likely choose pay rise.
The insurance is probably counted towards their tax allowance too so actually costs the workers more money and most won’t ever use it.
So, unskilled non-technical labour demanding to be paid the same as my skilled technical work. What's the point of me obtaining and maintaining a technical skillset if I'm paid the same as non-technical unskilled work?
While you may get Amazon workers being paid £15/hr, it will result in people higher up the chain like me and my colleagues losing their jobs. Management will say: we've got ten engineers on £15/hr, but Amazon workers are now on £15, so our engineers will now cost £25, right we'll only have six engineers thank you.
>"...nightmarish scenarios heard from Amazon workers across the globe: grueling shifts, constant micromanagement and surveillance, and punishment if strict time frames are not met."
If the job is that bad, and the rewards are that low, why are they still working there? These warehouse workers are not suggesting they are un-employable elsewhere, are they? And I really doubt they are doing the job based on an un-dying love of Jeff Bezos.
A quick search on UK unemployment is a 3.7% That sounds like there are plenty of jobs available. I cannot believe these Amazon warehouse workers are unable to find alternative employment and are stuck in this job.
This is an Amazon job. In a warehouse. Packing boxes. It sucks. But it is not a career. Take what skills can be earned, and move on to something better.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
