Survey sent in the email: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ZSJH2G3
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.
So all that "stakeholder capitalism" recent discussion was pure BS? [1]
[1] https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/investor-relations/larry...
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.
The profession doesn't matter at all, because anyone can go to the streets and protest to defend public interests. But attacking your own employer is not a solution. Why not to look for a job at NGO, or get involved in a non-profit startup instead? Oh, it doesn't pay well enough? Then you have to come into an agreement with yourself.
You're seriously asking why a lowly-paid Amazon employee doesn't look for a NGO or a non-profit startup job instead? No offence, but is this satire? It seems like a Silicon Valley episode to me.
> More than 340 tech workers at Amazon used the hashtag #AMZNSpeakOut in public statements that condemn the company for not taking sufficient action on the climate crisis.
I'm sure that tech workers at Amazon are compensated quite handsomely. And even if those protesters were low paid warehouse staff (unlikely, protesting climate change is something that only those very well off can afford) do you assume that NGO would pay even less?
Yeah I do actually, often people pay NGOs to be able to work under an NGO.