zlacker

I feel like "not using Amazon" doesn't actually do much because they there's no way to send the signal that you're not buying because of the strike as opposed to a million other reasons you might not be spending.

I think a more effective solution would be to keep buying like you normally do but if/when your service is worse due to being short staffed send a message to their support.

>>Spivak+(OP)
> I feel like "not using Amazon" doesn't actually do much...

Whoever is fulfilling your order during the strike is a scab, and you're helping pay their wage. It is destructive to the strike.

It's about solidarity with the working people and helping with their demands.

The point is to not give money to businesses who workers are striking against.

> I think a more effective solution would be to keep buying like you normally do...

Doing this destroys the strike.

>>Spivak+(OP)
You could just call support without placing an order. That checks both boxes, wastes their time, and deprives them of money until they acknowledge their workers' needs.

>>EarthI+y
> Whoever is fulfilling your order during the strike is a scab

Wait, but I'm not supposed to actually get the order in this hypothetical. I place and order, the workers don't actually fill it, I complain and get my money back, cost Amazon money, and tell their customer service that I'm upset that the strike is inconveniencing me and they should treat their workers better.

The number of non-Amazon workers that are aware of this strike will never reach critical mass so if there's enough non-strikers to still do business as usual the strike is already over, right?

>>myself+n1
Are the support workers striking?