zlacker

>>perfun+(OP)
I know a guy who works at Amazon. The person who spammed the internal email list soliciting participants for this is no longer at the company.

Survey sent in the email: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ZSJH2G3

>>throwa+J2
> The person who spammed the internal email list soliciting participants for this is no longer at the company.

I could understand this from the AMZN shareholders point of view: as an employee of the company you are paid to defend private interests, not public interests.

>>krn+Y4
> as an employee of the company you are paid to defend private interests, not public interests

So all that "stakeholder capitalism" recent discussion was pure BS? [1]

[1] https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/investor-relations/larry...

>>pagane+57
That should come from the top, not from the bottom of the company. It's not the responsibility of a lower level employee to define what his company stands for. Everyone is free to work for a company that matches his values.

>>krn+Z8
> Everyone is free to work for a company that matches his values.

No, they are not. Maybe it is true for a select group of people (computer programmers, some lawyers, some medical professionals), but the vast majority of people are not "free to work" and choose any company that matches "their values". Which makes protests like this one even more important and noteworthy, as those people protesting are risking a lot more compared to the "privileged" professions I mentioned above.