zlacker

Not necessarily. Choosing whether to quarantine people is a judgement call, but going into work after being ordered not to is insubordination and trespass.

>>Anthon+(OP)
>Choosing whether to quarantine people is a judgement call,

This judgment call changed. If bureaucratic ineptitude was to blame, those people ignored proper procedure, making them insubordinate, and risked lives. And if they found the issue confusing enough to take eighteen days to issue the quarantine notice, they should understand why this employee might think they are being targeted for their labor practices.

>>boombo+yC
> This judgment call changed.

The available information changed. This very quickly went from something many people weren't sure wasn't going to be maybe a nasty flu to something that has half the world staying home from work and hospitals getting overrun. Changing your procedures in response to new information is what managers should be doing.

>>Anthon+j31
This is just wrong, this disease was not some mystery three weeks ago and implying that the Amazon managers just learned of the dangers last weekend is absurd.

>>boombo+hm1
Three weeks ago there were less than 5000 known cases in the US, now there are about a quarter of a million and the most in the world. The idea that what we know now is equivalent to what we knew then is absurd. Three weeks ago there was some hope it could be contained using ordinary measures.

They'd have been smarter to respond to it sooner, but better late than never.

>>Anthon+uY3
The US declared a national emergency on the thirteenth. Every day past that in which they did not quarantine the employee is a far greater risk than the day he came in. And the idea that they didn't understand the risks until the 28th is ridiculous.

You're trying to spin it both ways. If Amazon was just idiotic about their response to the outbreak, why did they pick that moment to suddenly take things super serious and fire the employee?