zlacker

>>blago+(OP)
Here is the key point Amazon claims he was exposed to the worker on March 11th. Over the weekened he said he is organizing a strike, so over the weekend they order him and only him into quarantine. A full 18 days after his 5 min exposure. From my reading of it, this almost certainly looks like retaliatory action due to the strike, and a company using the excuse of quarantine to cover it up.

Key excerpts from a much clearer article. And yet again, why you never 100% believe a company's PR response when they're trying to cover themselves. They tell just enough truth, but use it to intentionally mislead.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/31/amazon-strik...

> According to the company’s previous statements, the infected co-worker in question last reported for work on 11 March. Had Smalls been exposed that day, a 14-day mandatory quarantine would have made him eligible to return as soon as 25 March.

> Smalls said Amazon did not send him home until 28 March, three weeks after the exposure.

> “No one else was put on quarantine,” he said, even as the infected person worked alongside “associates for 10-plus hours a week”.

> “You put me on quarantine for coming into contact with somebody, but I was around [that person] for less than five minutes,” he told Vice.

> According to Amazon, no one else was fired. Smalls said he was considering legal action, calling it “a no-brainer”.

>>Boiled+x7
We should apply rigor to both sides. Each has incentive to cherry pick and mislead.

> key point Amazon claims he was exposed to the worker on March 11th

Did they claim that? I'm looking for a source on this. "According to the company’s previous statements, the infected co-worker in question last reported for work on 11 March", but when you look at their linked source[1] it says: "Amazon confirmed an associate, who reported for work on 11 March, has since been diagnosed with Covid-19".

> “No one else was put on quarantine,” he said

Is this confirmed? You can't just assume this to be true. Pretty damning if so, though.

> “You put me on quarantine for coming into contact with somebody, but I was around [that person] for less than five minutes,” he told Vice.

Viral transmission has no minimum timeline and often occurs at first point of contact (e.g., handshake) or cough/sneeze at any time. Kind of irresponsible to even print that quote without correcting the argument.

It may be that Amazon retaliated, but stuff like this doesn't prove it. We need the hard facts. At this point it's unclear and sounds fishy on both sides.

1. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/mar/30/amazon-wo...

>>Reedx+Fb
You aren’t being rigorous at all, you are just asking questions and have no idea about the answers.

>>megabl+Eb1
asking questions when you know the answers is pretty pointless, innit

>>samatm+3c1
Well there's a difference between asking questions with the actual intent to find the answers, and asking just in order to 'both sides' a discussion without contributing any new information. The latter is more akin to sealioning, really.