zlacker

>>claude+(OP)
> “We support every employee’s right to criticize their employer’s working conditions, but that does not come with blanket immunity against any and all internal policies,” Herdener said.

> Amazon’s external communications policy prohibits employees from commenting publicly on its business without corporate justification and approval from executives. Herdener previously said the policy did not allow employees to “publicly disparage or misrepresent the company.”

Amazon is straight up firing these people for expressing their personal opinions. Amazon isn't even claiming they lied, or pretend to speak officially, or any other reason.

>>advise+ce
Amazon is firing them for commenting publicly on its business.

If you were employed by a company and disparaged them publicly, breaking company policy, would you believe that your employment with them is in any way protected?

>>alehul+ef
Such policies are facially illegal under the National Labor Relations Act, which guarantees workers the right to engaged in protected concerted activity, such as discussing their working conditions with eachother, the press, and the public. The tweets that got these two fired were explicitly about working conditions.

Google had a similar policy and, after losing NLRA cases, had to issue a notice to all employees saying that its previous policies no longer included discussing working conditions with the public.

Amazon will likely get sued over this, and very likely lose in a similar matter, as their conduct here is even more egregious.

>>YokoZa+ju
They weren't discussing their working conditions.