1. Their attrition rate is irrelevant to this conversation. People attrite for a million different reasons. Check the attrition rate of a call center, it's higher than 150%.
2. I read that NYT article when it came out. It's full of anecdotes. Big fucking deal. I deal with data in my world, not anecdotes.
3. Why is it bad that it's about one person? Do you think Jeff Bezos notices what happens in his corporate tax bill? They just moved on to NOVA. Wow, what a victory for AOC. She really showed them. Or should I say "him".. since it's about Jeff Bezos, not the hundreds of thousands of employees and potential employees. Demagoguery.
1. I'm sure you would appreciate being replaced every 8 months. Anecdotes? Its a business philosophy being pushed by Bezos and studied by business schools. You don't think its real? And call center turnover rates? I checked. Seems your spreading ancedotes:
Aug 17, 2021 — According to Quality Assurance and Training Connection, turnover in the call center industry averages 30% and 45%. When you lose a call center ...
Sep 30, 2020 — The average turnover rate for a call center is 30-40%, but some centers see numbers as high as 100% in a single year. Hopefully, some of this ...
Call Center Attrition averages around 32.6%. ... February 12, 2021 ... While the rate at which people leave call centers, no matter the size of the center, ...
3. AOC's victory was for her constituents. In her district. As I said, fuck Bezos.
First, the links you provided don't seem to indicate whether these are onshore, near shore or offshore numbers. Attrition will vary wildly based on teh locations. Attrition in the Philippines, India, Costa Rica, etc. is very, very low because these are first world jobs. Now in Buffalo, Phoenix, and other larger cities that are a hotbed of call center, the numbers are higher. When you get to places like Arcadia, NY, El Paso, etc. they tend to fall in the middle. Teh industry makes a huge difference in the rates as well.
Regardless, you seem to think that attrition means involuntary, based on your comment about being replaced every 8 months. My guess is that vast, vast majority of these are not terminations, but voluntary. Replacing even 50% of your workforce through terminations every year would be insane, simply because of the unemployment claims you would have to manage. Do you have a number that delineates voluntary vs terms?
Last, I appreciate your distaste for Bezos and belief that making economic decisions for the whole of an area based on that personal distaste. BTW, the HQ wasn't even in her district so it wasn't about "her" constituents". But just a question, is it fair to say that you don't have an Amazon account and have never ordered from Amazon?
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I think the elite are well aware some want to tax them more. This won't be news to them. Maybe what you say was her true intent, but it's kind of ham fisted and very likely to be used against her, just like this is being used against her. As I always say after one of her stunts "she needs to be smarter". She started her career by trying a coup against Pelosi and she continues to make silly mistakes.
She started her career by running against a long term incumbent in a dem primary. She took on Nancy and survived. And wasn’t treated like Liz Darth Cheney. Silly mistake? Her base isn’t the “elite.”
She has not accomplished anything, that I'm aware of, during her time in congress. I think she has sponsored a few bills and they didn't even get out of committee.
Name me any first or second term Congress person, from either party, who has “accomplished” anything. Further, is not voting on bills, on behalf of your constituents and not the monied elite donor class, accomplishing something? You have an odd take on representation in Congress.
She's a celebrity then, not a representative. Do the work. You can call her successful when she is successful then. I'd be curious who she motivates to vote, liberals or conservatives. I wouldn't be surprised if she motivates the right more than the left, just like MGT.
My center left representative (Spanberger) almost lost in 2020 because of the stupid "defund the police" mantra. Taht's the kind of idiocy that does NOT win elections in swing districts. She laid into Pelosi and others after the election for not shutting that down sooner.
What’s her voting record as it relates to the demographics of her district? Do the work? How much of the Green New Deal made its way into Biden’s infrastructure and tax bill? Not all “work” in Congress is measured by legislation that you sponsored or introduced getting passed. And you didn’t answer the question. Hint, it’s a rare occurrence, if it happens at all, that a first or second term congress person gets a bill they wrote passed. Her work is shifting the debate and getting folks to notice. Nancy recognizes that she’s got a future in the dem party and is a key part of the progressive coalition. AOC is no “fool.”
Hate to break it to you but any dem is a boogeyman for the repubs in their campaigns. What else is new?
No, not any dem. One that goes to a 35k gala and wears a Tax the Rich dress is unserious in my book.
And I'm not going to get into stupid debates about how many reps have sponsored successful bills in their first two terms. Are you saying that number is zero? Because I seriously doubt that is the case.
But let's pull the thread. Can you defend the attempted coup? Can you defend her pushing Amazon HQ out of NYC? I say thanks to that. We welcomed all of the new jobs here in VA. And it appears she did it because she thinks Jeff Bezos, who owns 10% of Amazon, is too rich. Or is she, a a rule, against companies moving to NYC? Idiotic in my book.
Her dress was borrowed for the event so there is that.
Her reasoning for ousting Amazon, which I understand, was it wasn't going to benefit her people.
The mere rumor of Amazon HQ2 drove real estate prices through the roof. What that was going to do to her constituents was drive rent prices up and her people out of that area.
Yes NY has rent control but if you want to renovate the building you can have the people move out until those are done. If it takes a year and a half do you really want to move back there?
Happens all the time here.
So as a rule, NYC politicians are against companies moving in, brining new job (white and blue collar) and restaurants, etc. Is the best way to control rent prices to just not have any jobs, therefore property will be cheap?
There's an awful lot square footage available in POOTWH Tower, maybe Amazon could set up shop there?
As a rule? C'mon, man. No, they're against giving ginormous tax breaks to one of the world's wealthiest individuals so his 200% employee turn over company can come in and displace folks with meager means who have lived in the neighborhood for generations in some instances.
See this is about one person.. Bezos. The guy that owns 10% of the company. The math is clear that the revenue generated to the state would far, far exceed the tax breaks. That makes this an NPV negative decision AND demagoguery.
And regarding the tax revenue generated, where does it go? Does it go back to the neighborhoods where the little people go to live in the form of better schools, roads, infrastructure, healthcare, etc. or does it flow up to the wealthy in the form of tax cuts/breaks? Or get spent in those other, wealthier communities with higher percentages of voter engagement and political contributions?
I'm seriously interested in this aspect of the impact on Northern Virginia or the state as a whole. Have a budget surplus? Seen reductions in childhood poverty, increases in education attainment or any other positive societal outcome of the net positive tax revenue?
Believe it or not NYC had a plan in place to upgrade schools in the surrounding area w that intravenous of tax revenue. But if we go back to my original statement on that surrounding area the people it was meant to benefit will all have been pushed out to reap any of those benefits.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I think the elite are well aware some want to tax them more. This won't be news to them. Maybe what you say was her true intent, but it's kind of ham fisted and very likely to be used against her, just like this is being used against her. As I always say after one of her stunts "she needs to be smarter". She started her career by trying a coup against Pelosi and she continues to make silly mistakes.
She started her career by running against a long term incumbent in a dem primary. She took on Nancy and survived. And wasn’t treated like Liz Darth Cheney. Silly mistake? Her base isn’t the “elite.”
She has not accomplished anything, that I'm aware of, during her time in congress. I think she has sponsored a few bills and they didn't even get out of committee.
Name me any first or second term Congress person, from either party, who has “accomplished” anything. Further, is not voting on bills, on behalf of your constituents and not the monied elite donor class, accomplishing something? You have an odd take on representation in Congress.
She's a celebrity then, not a representative. Do the work. You can call her successful when she is successful then. I'd be curious who she motivates to vote, liberals or conservatives. I wouldn't be surprised if she motivates the right more than the left, just like MGT.
My center left representative (Spanberger) almost lost in 2020 because of the stupid "defund the police" mantra. Taht's the kind of idiocy that does NOT win elections in swing districts. She laid into Pelosi and others after the election for not shutting that down sooner.
What’s her voting record as it relates to the demographics of her district? Do the work? How much of the Green New Deal made its way into Biden’s infrastructure and tax bill? Not all “work” in Congress is measured by legislation that you sponsored or introduced getting passed. And you didn’t answer the question. Hint, it’s a rare occurrence, if it happens at all, that a first or second term congress person gets a bill they wrote passed. Her work is shifting the debate and getting folks to notice. Nancy recognizes that she’s got a future in the dem party and is a key part of the progressive coalition. AOC is no “fool.”
Hate to break it to you but any dem is a boogeyman for the repubs in their campaigns. What else is new?
No, not any dem. One that goes to a 35k gala and wears a Tax the Rich dress is unserious in my book.
And I'm not going to get into stupid debates about how many reps have sponsored successful bills in their first two terms. Are you saying that number is zero? Because I seriously doubt that is the case.
But let's pull the thread. Can you defend the attempted coup? Can you defend her pushing Amazon HQ out of NYC? I say thanks to that. We welcomed all of the new jobs here in VA. And it appears she did it because she thinks Jeff Bezos, who owns 10% of Amazon, is too rich. Or is she, a a rule, against companies moving to NYC? Idiotic in my book.
Her dress was borrowed for the event so there is that.
Her reasoning for ousting Amazon, which I understand, was it wasn't going to benefit her people.
The mere rumor of Amazon HQ2 drove real estate prices through the roof. What that was going to do to her constituents was drive rent prices up and her people out of that area.
Yes NY has rent control but if you want to renovate the building you can have the people move out until those are done. If it takes a year and a half do you really want to move back there?
Happens all the time here.
So as a rule, NYC politicians are against companies moving in, brining new job (white and blue collar) and restaurants, etc. Is the best way to control rent prices to just not have any jobs, therefore property will be cheap?
There's an awful lot square footage available in POOTWH Tower, maybe Amazon could set up shop there?
As a rule? C'mon, man. No, they're against giving ginormous tax breaks to one of the world's wealthiest individuals so his 200% employee turn over company can come in and displace folks with meager means who have lived in the neighborhood for generations in some instances.
See this is about one person.. Bezos. The guy that owns 10% of the company. The math is clear that the revenue generated to the state would far, far exceed the tax breaks. That makes this an NPV negative decision AND demagoguery.
And regarding the tax revenue generated, where does it go? Does it go back to the neighborhoods where the little people go to live in the form of better schools, roads, infrastructure, healthcare, etc. or does it flow up to the wealthy in the form of tax cuts/breaks? Or get spent in those other, wealthier communities with higher percentages of voter engagement and political contributions?
I'm seriously interested in this aspect of the impact on Northern Virginia or the state as a whole. Have a budget surplus? Seen reductions in childhood poverty, increases in education attainment or any other positive societal outcome of the net positive tax revenue?
Believe it or not NYC had a plan in place to upgrade schools in the surrounding area w that intravenous of tax revenue. But if we go back to my original statement on that surrounding area the people it was meant to benefit will all have been pushed out to reap any of those benefits.
Well you have rent control, right? And if you bring in 25k jobs, that's also surrounding and supporting jobs. But what's the alternative? Never bring in new business? Is that better?
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I think the elite are well aware some want to tax them more. This won't be news to them. Maybe what you say was her true intent, but it's kind of ham fisted and very likely to be used against her, just like this is being used against her. As I always say after one of her stunts "she needs to be smarter". She started her career by trying a coup against Pelosi and she continues to make silly mistakes.
She started her career by running against a long term incumbent in a dem primary. She took on Nancy and survived. And wasn’t treated like Liz Darth Cheney. Silly mistake? Her base isn’t the “elite.”
She has not accomplished anything, that I'm aware of, during her time in congress. I think she has sponsored a few bills and they didn't even get out of committee.
Name me any first or second term Congress person, from either party, who has “accomplished” anything. Further, is not voting on bills, on behalf of your constituents and not the monied elite donor class, accomplishing something? You have an odd take on representation in Congress.
She's a celebrity then, not a representative. Do the work. You can call her successful when she is successful then. I'd be curious who she motivates to vote, liberals or conservatives. I wouldn't be surprised if she motivates the right more than the left, just like MGT.
My center left representative (Spanberger) almost lost in 2020 because of the stupid "defund the police" mantra. Taht's the kind of idiocy that does NOT win elections in swing districts. She laid into Pelosi and others after the election for not shutting that down sooner.
What’s her voting record as it relates to the demographics of her district? Do the work? How much of the Green New Deal made its way into Biden’s infrastructure and tax bill? Not all “work” in Congress is measured by legislation that you sponsored or introduced getting passed. And you didn’t answer the question. Hint, it’s a rare occurrence, if it happens at all, that a first or second term congress person gets a bill they wrote passed. Her work is shifting the debate and getting folks to notice. Nancy recognizes that she’s got a future in the dem party and is a key part of the progressive coalition. AOC is no “fool.”
Hate to break it to you but any dem is a boogeyman for the repubs in their campaigns. What else is new?
No, not any dem. One that goes to a 35k gala and wears a Tax the Rich dress is unserious in my book.
And I'm not going to get into stupid debates about how many reps have sponsored successful bills in their first two terms. Are you saying that number is zero? Because I seriously doubt that is the case.
But let's pull the thread. Can you defend the attempted coup? Can you defend her pushing Amazon HQ out of NYC? I say thanks to that. We welcomed all of the new jobs here in VA. And it appears she did it because she thinks Jeff Bezos, who owns 10% of Amazon, is too rich. Or is she, a a rule, against companies moving to NYC? Idiotic in my book.
Her dress was borrowed for the event so there is that.
Her reasoning for ousting Amazon, which I understand, was it wasn't going to benefit her people.
The mere rumor of Amazon HQ2 drove real estate prices through the roof. What that was going to do to her constituents was drive rent prices up and her people out of that area.
Yes NY has rent control but if you want to renovate the building you can have the people move out until those are done. If it takes a year and a half do you really want to move back there?
Happens all the time here.
So as a rule, NYC politicians are against companies moving in, brining new job (white and blue collar) and restaurants, etc. Is the best way to control rent prices to just not have any jobs, therefore property will be cheap?
If you have lets say 200,000 people living in that area and rent becomes incontrollable and now only affluent people can live there those people have to move.
Where are they going? Their jobs and livelihood are most likely in that surrounding area. Now they get forced out. It's a form of gentrification.
The jobs aspect and taxes I can understand but that wasn't representing HER constituents so she did what the people she works for wanted.
I wanted it here for jobs and such. It would suck though to be anywhere near LIC after it would be built. That place is a nightmare now so I can only imagine what it would be like after HQ2?
Why can't any of her people work for Amazon? And yeah, gentrification happens everywhere. Is reducing an area to a slum a better option? What company is she waiting for to come in and bring the perfect mix of jobs and income, without any rent issues, etc. I don't believe in Utopia.
1- Yes they could if they still could afford to live there. 2-Yes it does. 3-The area isn't a slum. It is opposite of that. LIC is one of the fastest up and coming cities in the US which is why Amazon chose the area. 4-The building oh HQ2 would only hurt her constituents. You keep missing that part where she works for them and they are the ones whom get impacted. Not the new people flush w money who can afford to live there.
Property values literally tripled and quadrupled over night.
Now I am just defending AOC's side of it. I personally think it should have been built and let progress prevail.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I think the elite are well aware some want to tax them more. This won't be news to them. Maybe what you say was her true intent, but it's kind of ham fisted and very likely to be used against her, just like this is being used against her. As I always say after one of her stunts "she needs to be smarter". She started her career by trying a coup against Pelosi and she continues to make silly mistakes.
She started her career by running against a long term incumbent in a dem primary. She took on Nancy and survived. And wasn’t treated like Liz Darth Cheney. Silly mistake? Her base isn’t the “elite.”
She has not accomplished anything, that I'm aware of, during her time in congress. I think she has sponsored a few bills and they didn't even get out of committee.
Name me any first or second term Congress person, from either party, who has “accomplished” anything. Further, is not voting on bills, on behalf of your constituents and not the monied elite donor class, accomplishing something? You have an odd take on representation in Congress.
She's a celebrity then, not a representative. Do the work. You can call her successful when she is successful then. I'd be curious who she motivates to vote, liberals or conservatives. I wouldn't be surprised if she motivates the right more than the left, just like MGT.
My center left representative (Spanberger) almost lost in 2020 because of the stupid "defund the police" mantra. Taht's the kind of idiocy that does NOT win elections in swing districts. She laid into Pelosi and others after the election for not shutting that down sooner.
What’s her voting record as it relates to the demographics of her district? Do the work? How much of the Green New Deal made its way into Biden’s infrastructure and tax bill? Not all “work” in Congress is measured by legislation that you sponsored or introduced getting passed. And you didn’t answer the question. Hint, it’s a rare occurrence, if it happens at all, that a first or second term congress person gets a bill they wrote passed. Her work is shifting the debate and getting folks to notice. Nancy recognizes that she’s got a future in the dem party and is a key part of the progressive coalition. AOC is no “fool.”
Hate to break it to you but any dem is a boogeyman for the repubs in their campaigns. What else is new?
No, not any dem. One that goes to a 35k gala and wears a Tax the Rich dress is unserious in my book.
And I'm not going to get into stupid debates about how many reps have sponsored successful bills in their first two terms. Are you saying that number is zero? Because I seriously doubt that is the case.
But let's pull the thread. Can you defend the attempted coup? Can you defend her pushing Amazon HQ out of NYC? I say thanks to that. We welcomed all of the new jobs here in VA. And it appears she did it because she thinks Jeff Bezos, who owns 10% of Amazon, is too rich. Or is she, a a rule, against companies moving to NYC? Idiotic in my book.
Her dress was borrowed for the event so there is that.
Her reasoning for ousting Amazon, which I understand, was it wasn't going to benefit her people.
The mere rumor of Amazon HQ2 drove real estate prices through the roof. What that was going to do to her constituents was drive rent prices up and her people out of that area.
Yes NY has rent control but if you want to renovate the building you can have the people move out until those are done. If it takes a year and a half do you really want to move back there?
Happens all the time here.
So as a rule, NYC politicians are against companies moving in, brining new job (white and blue collar) and restaurants, etc. Is the best way to control rent prices to just not have any jobs, therefore property will be cheap?
There's an awful lot square footage available in POOTWH Tower, maybe Amazon could set up shop there?
As a rule? C'mon, man. No, they're against giving ginormous tax breaks to one of the world's wealthiest individuals so his 200% employee turn over company can come in and displace folks with meager means who have lived in the neighborhood for generations in some instances.
See this is about one person.. Bezos. The guy that owns 10% of the company. The math is clear that the revenue generated to the state would far, far exceed the tax breaks. That makes this an NPV negative decision AND demagoguery.
And regarding the tax revenue generated, where does it go? Does it go back to the neighborhoods where the little people go to live in the form of better schools, roads, infrastructure, healthcare, etc. or does it flow up to the wealthy in the form of tax cuts/breaks? Or get spent in those other, wealthier communities with higher percentages of voter engagement and political contributions?
I'm seriously interested in this aspect of the impact on Northern Virginia or the state as a whole. Have a budget surplus? Seen reductions in childhood poverty, increases in education attainment or any other positive societal outcome of the net positive tax revenue?
Believe it or not NYC had a plan in place to upgrade schools in the surrounding area w that intravenous of tax revenue. But if we go back to my original statement on that surrounding area the people it was meant to benefit will all have been pushed out to reap any of those benefits.
Well you have rent control, right? And if you bring in 25k jobs, that's also surrounding and supporting jobs. But what's the alternative? Never bring in new business? Is that better?
I explained the way around rent control. I renovate the building and make you move out. They give you the option to come back at 10% higher or whatever but it's a year to year and a half later. By then you will have moved on with your life.
Or
I keep raising the rent the max that I can every year until it's too much for you.
New jobs are good, I mentioned that I think it should have been built. If I was living in that area in a lower income apartment I would have been worried sick on what would happen next.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I think the elite are well aware some want to tax them more. This won't be news to them. Maybe what you say was her true intent, but it's kind of ham fisted and very likely to be used against her, just like this is being used against her. As I always say after one of her stunts "she needs to be smarter". She started her career by trying a coup against Pelosi and she continues to make silly mistakes.
She started her career by running against a long term incumbent in a dem primary. She took on Nancy and survived. And wasn’t treated like Liz Darth Cheney. Silly mistake? Her base isn’t the “elite.”
She has not accomplished anything, that I'm aware of, during her time in congress. I think she has sponsored a few bills and they didn't even get out of committee.
Name me any first or second term Congress person, from either party, who has “accomplished” anything. Further, is not voting on bills, on behalf of your constituents and not the monied elite donor class, accomplishing something? You have an odd take on representation in Congress.
She's a celebrity then, not a representative. Do the work. You can call her successful when she is successful then. I'd be curious who she motivates to vote, liberals or conservatives. I wouldn't be surprised if she motivates the right more than the left, just like MGT.
My center left representative (Spanberger) almost lost in 2020 because of the stupid "defund the police" mantra. Taht's the kind of idiocy that does NOT win elections in swing districts. She laid into Pelosi and others after the election for not shutting that down sooner.
What’s her voting record as it relates to the demographics of her district? Do the work? How much of the Green New Deal made its way into Biden’s infrastructure and tax bill? Not all “work” in Congress is measured by legislation that you sponsored or introduced getting passed. And you didn’t answer the question. Hint, it’s a rare occurrence, if it happens at all, that a first or second term congress person gets a bill they wrote passed. Her work is shifting the debate and getting folks to notice. Nancy recognizes that she’s got a future in the dem party and is a key part of the progressive coalition. AOC is no “fool.”
Hate to break it to you but any dem is a boogeyman for the repubs in their campaigns. What else is new?
No, not any dem. One that goes to a 35k gala and wears a Tax the Rich dress is unserious in my book.
And I'm not going to get into stupid debates about how many reps have sponsored successful bills in their first two terms. Are you saying that number is zero? Because I seriously doubt that is the case.
But let's pull the thread. Can you defend the attempted coup? Can you defend her pushing Amazon HQ out of NYC? I say thanks to that. We welcomed all of the new jobs here in VA. And it appears she did it because she thinks Jeff Bezos, who owns 10% of Amazon, is too rich. Or is she, a a rule, against companies moving to NYC? Idiotic in my book.
Her dress was borrowed for the event so there is that.
Her reasoning for ousting Amazon, which I understand, was it wasn't going to benefit her people.
The mere rumor of Amazon HQ2 drove real estate prices through the roof. What that was going to do to her constituents was drive rent prices up and her people out of that area.
Yes NY has rent control but if you want to renovate the building you can have the people move out until those are done. If it takes a year and a half do you really want to move back there?
Happens all the time here.
So as a rule, NYC politicians are against companies moving in, brining new job (white and blue collar) and restaurants, etc. Is the best way to control rent prices to just not have any jobs, therefore property will be cheap?
If you have lets say 200,000 people living in that area and rent becomes incontrollable and now only affluent people can live there those people have to move.
Where are they going? Their jobs and livelihood are most likely in that surrounding area. Now they get forced out. It's a form of gentrification.
The jobs aspect and taxes I can understand but that wasn't representing HER constituents so she did what the people she works for wanted.
I wanted it here for jobs and such. It would suck though to be anywhere near LIC after it would be built. That place is a nightmare now so I can only imagine what it would be like after HQ2?
Why can't any of her people work for Amazon? And yeah, gentrification happens everywhere. Is reducing an area to a slum a better option? What company is she waiting for to come in and bring the perfect mix of jobs and income, without any rent issues, etc. I don't believe in Utopia.
1- Yes they could if they still could afford to live there. 2-Yes it does. 3-The area isn't a slum. It is opposite of that. LIC is one of the fastest up and coming cities in the US which is why Amazon chose the area. 4-The building oh HQ2 would only hurt her constituents. You keep missing that part where she works for them and they are the ones whom get impacted. Not the new people flush w money who can afford to live there.
Property values literally tripled and quadrupled over night.
Now I am just defending AOC's side of it. I personally think it should have been built and let progress prevail.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I think the elite are well aware some want to tax them more. This won't be news to them. Maybe what you say was her true intent, but it's kind of ham fisted and very likely to be used against her, just like this is being used against her. As I always say after one of her stunts "she needs to be smarter". She started her career by trying a coup against Pelosi and she continues to make silly mistakes.
She started her career by running against a long term incumbent in a dem primary. She took on Nancy and survived. And wasn’t treated like Liz Darth Cheney. Silly mistake? Her base isn’t the “elite.”
She has not accomplished anything, that I'm aware of, during her time in congress. I think she has sponsored a few bills and they didn't even get out of committee.
Name me any first or second term Congress person, from either party, who has “accomplished” anything. Further, is not voting on bills, on behalf of your constituents and not the monied elite donor class, accomplishing something? You have an odd take on representation in Congress.
She's a celebrity then, not a representative. Do the work. You can call her successful when she is successful then. I'd be curious who she motivates to vote, liberals or conservatives. I wouldn't be surprised if she motivates the right more than the left, just like MGT.
My center left representative (Spanberger) almost lost in 2020 because of the stupid "defund the police" mantra. Taht's the kind of idiocy that does NOT win elections in swing districts. She laid into Pelosi and others after the election for not shutting that down sooner.
What’s her voting record as it relates to the demographics of her district? Do the work? How much of the Green New Deal made its way into Biden’s infrastructure and tax bill? Not all “work” in Congress is measured by legislation that you sponsored or introduced getting passed. And you didn’t answer the question. Hint, it’s a rare occurrence, if it happens at all, that a first or second term congress person gets a bill they wrote passed. Her work is shifting the debate and getting folks to notice. Nancy recognizes that she’s got a future in the dem party and is a key part of the progressive coalition. AOC is no “fool.”
Hate to break it to you but any dem is a boogeyman for the repubs in their campaigns. What else is new?
No, not any dem. One that goes to a 35k gala and wears a Tax the Rich dress is unserious in my book.
And I'm not going to get into stupid debates about how many reps have sponsored successful bills in their first two terms. Are you saying that number is zero? Because I seriously doubt that is the case.
But let's pull the thread. Can you defend the attempted coup? Can you defend her pushing Amazon HQ out of NYC? I say thanks to that. We welcomed all of the new jobs here in VA. And it appears she did it because she thinks Jeff Bezos, who owns 10% of Amazon, is too rich. Or is she, a a rule, against companies moving to NYC? Idiotic in my book.
Her dress was borrowed for the event so there is that.
Her reasoning for ousting Amazon, which I understand, was it wasn't going to benefit her people.
The mere rumor of Amazon HQ2 drove real estate prices through the roof. What that was going to do to her constituents was drive rent prices up and her people out of that area.
Yes NY has rent control but if you want to renovate the building you can have the people move out until those are done. If it takes a year and a half do you really want to move back there?
Happens all the time here.
So as a rule, NYC politicians are against companies moving in, brining new job (white and blue collar) and restaurants, etc. Is the best way to control rent prices to just not have any jobs, therefore property will be cheap?
If you have lets say 200,000 people living in that area and rent becomes incontrollable and now only affluent people can live there those people have to move.
Where are they going? Their jobs and livelihood are most likely in that surrounding area. Now they get forced out. It's a form of gentrification.
The jobs aspect and taxes I can understand but that wasn't representing HER constituents so she did what the people she works for wanted.
I wanted it here for jobs and such. It would suck though to be anywhere near LIC after it would be built. That place is a nightmare now so I can only imagine what it would be like after HQ2?
Why can't any of her people work for Amazon? And yeah, gentrification happens everywhere. Is reducing an area to a slum a better option? What company is she waiting for to come in and bring the perfect mix of jobs and income, without any rent issues, etc. I don't believe in Utopia.
1- Yes they could if they still could afford to live there. 2-Yes it does. 3-The area isn't a slum. It is opposite of that. LIC is one of the fastest up and coming cities in the US which is why Amazon chose the area. 4-The building oh HQ2 would only hurt her constituents. You keep missing that part where she works for them and they are the ones whom get impacted. Not the new people flush w money who can afford to live there.
Property values literally tripled and quadrupled over night.
Now I am just defending AOC's side of it. I personally think it should have been built and let progress prevail.
Are you playing devil's advocate here? I understand there are downsides to Amazon coming, but I believe in the net, it was a loss for the City to kill the deal. No deal is win, win, win for every citizen, govt and business.
income, without any rent issues, etc. I don't believe in Utopia.
1- Yes they could if they still could afford to live there. 2-Yes it does. 3-The area isn't a slum. It is opposite of that. LIC is one of the fastest up and coming cities in the US which is why Amazon chose the area. 4-The building oh HQ2 would only hurt her constituents. You keep missing that part where she works for them and they are the ones whom get impacted. Not the new people flush w money who can afford to live there.
Property values literally tripled and quadrupled over night.
Now I am just defending AOC's side of it. I personally think it should have been built and let progress prevail.
She doesn't represent LIC
No shit. It borders her district. I pointed that out when I first started talking about it. The events impact her community because it borders this area.
income, without any rent issues, etc. I don't believe in Utopia.
1- Yes they could if they still could afford to live there. 2-Yes it does. 3-The area isn't a slum. It is opposite of that. LIC is one of the fastest up and coming cities in the US which is why Amazon chose the area. 4-The building oh HQ2 would only hurt her constituents. You keep missing that part where she works for them and they are the ones whom get impacted. Not the new people flush w money who can afford to live there.
Property values literally tripled and quadrupled over night.
Now I am just defending AOC's side of it. I personally think it should have been built and let progress prevail.
Are you playing devil's advocate here? I understand there are downsides to Amazon coming, but I believe in the net, it was a loss for the City to kill the deal. No deal is win, win, win for every citizen, govt and business.
Yes I have stated that I agree with you. I am just pointing out why AOC did what she did. If she were Mayor or Governor I wonder if she would have went a different route? She is working and rightfully so, for her district.
She also wasn't the only reason HQ2 wasn't built. There was someone in Albany that was never going to let that happen. I have to go back and look up his name.
In reality AOC wasn't the little engine that could. She wasn't David in this. She had a part and was given the bigger stage for it though.
income, without any rent issues, etc. I don't believe in Utopia.
1- Yes they could if they still could afford to live there. 2-Yes it does. 3-The area isn't a slum. It is opposite of that. LIC is one of the fastest up and coming cities in the US which is why Amazon chose the area. 4-The building oh HQ2 would only hurt her constituents. You keep missing that part where she works for them and they are the ones whom get impacted. Not the new people flush w money who can afford to live there.
Property values literally tripled and quadrupled over night.
Now I am just defending AOC's side of it. I personally think it should have been built and let progress prevail.
Are you playing devil's advocate here? I understand there are downsides to Amazon coming, but I believe in the net, it was a loss for the City to kill the deal. No deal is win, win, win for every citizen, govt and business.
Yes I have stated that I agree with you. I am just pointing out why AOC did what she did. If she were Mayor or Governor I wonder if she would have went a different route? She is working and rightfully so, for her district.
She also wasn't the only reason HQ2 wasn't built. There was someone in Albany that was never going to let that happen. I have to go back and look up his name.
In reality AOC wasn't the little engine that could. She wasn't David in this. She had a part and was given the bigger stage for it though.
I agree with all of this. I know why she did what she did, I just think it was a bad decision and counterproductive to the area. It didn't hurt Bezos and maybe it hurt the area. She may me have been the only person involved but she sure as hell trumpeted it. And btw, the actual representative of the area, Maloney, was pissed because she supported the deal. So let's not forget that important point.
Dem Rep Maloney Hits Back at AOC’s Opposition to Amazon HQ2: ‘It Used to Be That We Would Protest Wa
Friday on CNN’s “OutFront,” Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) reacted to Amazon’s decision to pull out of an agreement to build its second headquarters in New York City.
The decision was heralded by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), but Maloney questioned that opposition.
Partial transcript as follows:
BURNETT: I want to ask you about another big story tonight, Amazon, abruptly canceling plans to build, it would be a massive headquarters in New York. People like your colleague Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have been celebrating this. You’ve seen this from some several progressives. She said, “Today was the day a group of dedicated everyday New Yorkers defeated Amazon’s corporate greed, its worker exploitation, and the power of the richest man in the world.”
It’s your district, not hers, now is that how you see it?
MALONEY: Absolutely. My constituents want jobs.
BURNETT: This was 25,000 job.
MALONEY: Twenty minimum, it would have been many, many more, 25,000 jobs at 150,000 minimum for the for the job. Many entry-level jobs would have been – many, many more they were working with the community on job fairs and the other types of entry-level jobs that they would have. There were promises for a new school and having – as a former teacher. I was intrigued with their plans to have a curriculum in 30 different schools supported by Amazon on high-tech.
We should be really diversifying our base of taxes, our base of businesses. We’re too dependent on financial services. And it used to be that we would protest wars. Now we’re protesting jobs. People are complaining about jobs coming to your – this is the best – let me tell you, Erin, if this had gone through, it would have made overnight New York City the high-tech capital of the East Coast. The most important job center for tech jobs.
And as a former member of the City Council, I have worked through several mayors in trying to figure out how to diversify our economy. We’ve been investing in high-tech schools, ones on my district, Cornell Tech to train the next geniuses in tech. Now, we would have had a place for them to go to work. But Amazon …
BURNETT: But you don’t because the progressives in your own party, including people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who get so much attention now. They stopped it.
MALONEY: Well, I’m a progressive too, but I’m pragmatic. If someone is going to bring a job to my district, to my city and billions of dollars in tax revenue, you also had a story this week that we were $3 billion under projected revenues for the state and roughly $1 billion under projected, this is the first quarter, we’re $4 billion less than we usually get and yet we’re kicking out a company that would have been paid – they were projecting over 10 years roughly $27 billion in taxes and not to mention the economic activity, the small businesses were thrilled because there would be more activity.
I am disappointed. It used to be if you wanted to change something you worked with the contract to change it. You didn’t just take them out.
BURNETT: No, they probably said they didn’t talk to them.
MALONEY: I know. They just said, “We don’t want it.” And they are demonstrating and against it, and it’s jobs, it’s jobs, I’ve never seen anything like this. Most of the time people are trying to figure out and spending most of their time trying to figure out how to bring jobs to New York and to keep them here.
1. Their attrition rate is irrelevant to this conversation. People attrite for a million different reasons. Check the attrition rate of a call center, it's higher than 150%.
2. I read that NYT article when it came out. It's full of anecdotes. Big fucking deal. I deal with data in my world, not anecdotes.
3. Why is it bad that it's about one person? Do you think Jeff Bezos notices what happens in his corporate tax bill? They just moved on to NOVA. Wow, what a victory for AOC. She really showed them. Or should I say "him".. since it's about Jeff Bezos, not the hundreds of thousands of employees and potential employees. Demagoguery.
1. I'm sure you would appreciate being replaced every 8 months. Anecdotes? Its a business philosophy being pushed by Bezos and studied by business schools. You don't think its real? And call center turnover rates? I checked. Seems your spreading ancedotes:
Aug 17, 2021 — According to Quality Assurance and Training Connection, turnover in the call center industry averages 30% and 45%. When you lose a call center ...
Sep 30, 2020 — The average turnover rate for a call center is 30-40%, but some centers see numbers as high as 100% in a single year. Hopefully, some of this ...
Call Center Attrition averages around 32.6%. ... February 12, 2021 ... While the rate at which people leave call centers, no matter the size of the center, ...
3. AOC's victory was for her constituents. In her district. As I said, fuck Bezos.
First, the links you provided don't seem to indicate whether these are onshore, near shore or offshore numbers. Attrition will vary wildly based on teh locations. Attrition in the Philippines, India, Costa Rica, etc. is very, very low because these are first world jobs. Now in Buffalo, Phoenix, and other larger cities that are a hotbed of call center, the numbers are higher. When you get to places like Arcadia, NY, El Paso, etc. they tend to fall in the middle. Teh industry makes a huge difference in the rates as well.
Regardless, you seem to think that attrition means involuntary, based on your comment about being replaced every 8 months. My guess is that vast, vast majority of these are not terminations, but voluntary. Replacing even 50% of your workforce through terminations every year would be insane, simply because of the unemployment claims you would have to manage. Do you have a number that delineates voluntary vs terms?
Last, I appreciate your distaste for Bezos and belief that making economic decisions for the whole of an area based on that personal distaste. BTW, the HQ wasn't even in her district so it wasn't about "her" constituents". But just a question, is it fair to say that you don't have an Amazon account and have never ordered from Amazon?
First, do you have any links that point to 200% attrition onshore? Is the "middle" 200% attrition as you claimed? Now you're saying the "industry" makes a huge difference as well? I thought we were discussing the "call center industry?" Without a delineation of on-shore versus off shore but go ahead, link me to onshore attrition rates since you're claiming 200% and as such the 150% attrition rate is a "so what" stat for you, ignoring that Amazon's rate is double similar businesses.
Second, I believe the article stated that the vast majority of terminations were involuntary in that the Bezos created automation and technological monitoring of productivity lead to involuntary terminations. Most states' unemployment benefits have very strict rules about collecting unemployment as it relates to "voluntary" or "involuntary" terminations, layoffs, length of service to the employer, probationary period, etc. I don't believe Amazon is "managing" some huge volume of unemployment claims as a result. And if they are, they're likely handled off-shore. I highly suggest that you read the previous Market Place article I linked and the following:
“Their business model is clearly one that’s based on treating their workers as expendable, and it’s designed with a high turnover model in mind,” said Berkowitz, who directs the National Employment Law Project’s worker health and safety program and spent six years in senior roles at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
Third, corporate tax bill? Is this a joke. Amazon didn't pay their fair share. But yea, give them more, they need it.
Amazon’s tax avoidance is consistent. Over the past three years, Amazon paid an effective federal income tax rate of just 4.3 percent on U.S. income. Over the past 10 years, Amazon’s effective federal tax rate on $57 billion of U.S. pretax income was just 4.7 percent, especially remarkable given that the legal rate was 35 percent for most of this period.
AOC's constituents live next door and would have been impacted. LIC has housing for the 10,000 employees? All 10,000 employees live in Crystal City, no impact beyond Alexandria County? C'mon man. Yea, I have personal distaste for Bezos. He's a scumbag because of his business model.
And last, no I do not have an Amazon account and refuse to buy anything from them. Ever since the brand name flat panel tv I bought in 2009 or 10 shit the bed after 3 months and Amazon refused any kind of assistance, because I didn't buy the extended warranty plan, and the manufacturer refused to honor the warranty because we purchased through a third party. I only use their web platform for researching products/pricing and then buy elsewhere. I don't need dirt cheap and instant gratification but I also tend to buy quality over price and use/wear shit until it disintegrates. And before you ask, yes, I shop at Whole Foods, mostly out of convenience. I spend way less there than I used to as their quality, selection and product offerings have gone down since Amazon bought them. Plus, they never have enough cashiers so the checkout lines are brutal and yet, haven't implemented self check out. Their employees also seem less happy to be working there as well. At least the ones that are still there. Different people behind the meat counter (the quality of their meat has really gone down), cheese counter and working the produce section, used to see the same people time and time again. I'm shopping more at indy butcher shops, farmer's markets and specialty stores as a result. Soon, I hope to avoid Whole Foods all together. I'm close.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I think the elite are well aware some want to tax them more. This won't be news to them. Maybe what you say was her true intent, but it's kind of ham fisted and very likely to be used against her, just like this is being used against her. As I always say after one of her stunts "she needs to be smarter". She started her career by trying a coup against Pelosi and she continues to make silly mistakes.
She started her career by running against a long term incumbent in a dem primary. She took on Nancy and survived. And wasn’t treated like Liz Darth Cheney. Silly mistake? Her base isn’t the “elite.”
She has not accomplished anything, that I'm aware of, during her time in congress. I think she has sponsored a few bills and they didn't even get out of committee.
Name me any first or second term Congress person, from either party, who has “accomplished” anything. Further, is not voting on bills, on behalf of your constituents and not the monied elite donor class, accomplishing something? You have an odd take on representation in Congress.
She's a celebrity then, not a representative. Do the work. You can call her successful when she is successful then. I'd be curious who she motivates to vote, liberals or conservatives. I wouldn't be surprised if she motivates the right more than the left, just like MGT.
My center left representative (Spanberger) almost lost in 2020 because of the stupid "defund the police" mantra. Taht's the kind of idiocy that does NOT win elections in swing districts. She laid into Pelosi and others after the election for not shutting that down sooner.
What’s her voting record as it relates to the demographics of her district? Do the work? How much of the Green New Deal made its way into Biden’s infrastructure and tax bill? Not all “work” in Congress is measured by legislation that you sponsored or introduced getting passed. And you didn’t answer the question. Hint, it’s a rare occurrence, if it happens at all, that a first or second term congress person gets a bill they wrote passed. Her work is shifting the debate and getting folks to notice. Nancy recognizes that she’s got a future in the dem party and is a key part of the progressive coalition. AOC is no “fool.”
Hate to break it to you but any dem is a boogeyman for the repubs in their campaigns. What else is new?
No, not any dem. One that goes to a 35k gala and wears a Tax the Rich dress is unserious in my book.
And I'm not going to get into stupid debates about how many reps have sponsored successful bills in their first two terms. Are you saying that number is zero? Because I seriously doubt that is the case.
But let's pull the thread. Can you defend the attempted coup? Can you defend her pushing Amazon HQ out of NYC? I say thanks to that. We welcomed all of the new jobs here in VA. And it appears she did it because she thinks Jeff Bezos, who owns 10% of Amazon, is too rich. Or is she, a a rule, against companies moving to NYC? Idiotic in my book.
Her dress was borrowed for the event so there is that.
Her reasoning for ousting Amazon, which I understand, was it wasn't going to benefit her people.
The mere rumor of Amazon HQ2 drove real estate prices through the roof. What that was going to do to her constituents was drive rent prices up and her people out of that area.
Yes NY has rent control but if you want to renovate the building you can have the people move out until those are done. If it takes a year and a half do you really want to move back there?
Happens all the time here.
So as a rule, NYC politicians are against companies moving in, brining new job (white and blue collar) and restaurants, etc. Is the best way to control rent prices to just not have any jobs, therefore property will be cheap?
If you have lets say 200,000 people living in that area and rent becomes incontrollable and now only affluent people can live there those people have to move.
Where are they going? Their jobs and livelihood are most likely in that surrounding area. Now they get forced out. It's a form of gentrification.
The jobs aspect and taxes I can understand but that wasn't representing HER constituents so she did what the people she works for wanted.
I wanted it here for jobs and such. It would suck though to be anywhere near LIC after it would be built. That place is a nightmare now so I can only imagine what it would be like after HQ2?
Why can't any of her people work for Amazon? And yeah, gentrification happens everywhere. Is reducing an area to a slum a better option? What company is she waiting for to come in and bring the perfect mix of jobs and income, without any rent issues, etc. I don't believe in Utopia.
1- Yes they could if they still could afford to live there. 2-Yes it does. 3-The area isn't a slum. It is opposite of that. LIC is one of the fastest up and coming cities in the US which is why Amazon chose the area. 4-The building oh HQ2 would only hurt her constituents. You keep missing that part where she works for them and they are the ones whom get impacted. Not the new people flush w money who can afford to live there.
Property values literally tripled and quadrupled over night.
Now I am just defending AOC's side of it. I personally think it should have been built and let progress prevail.
I grew up visiting my grandparents in Woodside.
I tripped out after I moved back east and drove up there to visit one of my clients, Steve Madden, in the same area.
Place is odd with some areas looking the same and some very different.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I think the elite are well aware some want to tax them more. This won't be news to them. Maybe what you say was her true intent, but it's kind of ham fisted and very likely to be used against her, just like this is being used against her. As I always say after one of her stunts "she needs to be smarter". She started her career by trying a coup against Pelosi and she continues to make silly mistakes.
She started her career by running against a long term incumbent in a dem primary. She took on Nancy and survived. And wasn’t treated like Liz Darth Cheney. Silly mistake? Her base isn’t the “elite.”
She has not accomplished anything, that I'm aware of, during her time in congress. I think she has sponsored a few bills and they didn't even get out of committee.
Name me any first or second term Congress person, from either party, who has “accomplished” anything. Further, is not voting on bills, on behalf of your constituents and not the monied elite donor class, accomplishing something? You have an odd take on representation in Congress.
She's a celebrity then, not a representative. Do the work. You can call her successful when she is successful then. I'd be curious who she motivates to vote, liberals or conservatives. I wouldn't be surprised if she motivates the right more than the left, just like MGT.
My center left representative (Spanberger) almost lost in 2020 because of the stupid "defund the police" mantra. Taht's the kind of idiocy that does NOT win elections in swing districts. She laid into Pelosi and others after the election for not shutting that down sooner.
Well, this is the thing. AOC seems to be doing a fine job of representing her constituents' interests/beliefs, but on a national scale it looks like a foolish stunt. Someone, somewhere, said that a ham sandwich with a (D) after its name could get elected in her district. I won't be that harsh -- she did unseat an incumbent after all. But the key to retaining control of the House is securing wins in swing districts, and this kind of stunt will be off--putting to the swing voters in swing districts, who can't relate to those Brooklyn Dems and who have their own priorities and who probably are still rolling their eyes at this. It's a short-sighted and, one might argue, selfish thing to do (because it's now about *her* and not about nailing down wins in mid-terms, which are the key to moving ANY agenda forward). Those gala pics will fuel WEEKS of rants by Tucker Carlson next year, just watch.
By the way: Is it just me or is the freaking Met gala being covered to death everywhere this year? I'm always aware that's it's happening, but the media coverage this year feels like it's on another level. Is this just the result of everyone being stuck at home for 18 months?
All those who seek to destroy the liberties of a democratic nation ought to know that war is the surest and shortest means to accomplish it.
1. Their attrition rate is irrelevant to this conversation. People attrite for a million different reasons. Check the attrition rate of a call center, it's higher than 150%.
2. I read that NYT article when it came out. It's full of anecdotes. Big fucking deal. I deal with data in my world, not anecdotes.
3. Why is it bad that it's about one person? Do you think Jeff Bezos notices what happens in his corporate tax bill? They just moved on to NOVA. Wow, what a victory for AOC. She really showed them. Or should I say "him".. since it's about Jeff Bezos, not the hundreds of thousands of employees and potential employees. Demagoguery.
1. I'm sure you would appreciate being replaced every 8 months. Anecdotes? Its a business philosophy being pushed by Bezos and studied by business schools. You don't think its real? And call center turnover rates? I checked. Seems your spreading ancedotes:
Aug 17, 2021 — According to Quality Assurance and Training Connection, turnover in the call center industry averages 30% and 45%. When you lose a call center ...
Sep 30, 2020 — The average turnover rate for a call center is 30-40%, but some centers see numbers as high as 100% in a single year. Hopefully, some of this ...
Call Center Attrition averages around 32.6%. ... February 12, 2021 ... While the rate at which people leave call centers, no matter the size of the center, ...
3. AOC's victory was for her constituents. In her district. As I said, fuck Bezos.
First, the links you provided don't seem to indicate whether these are onshore, near shore or offshore numbers. Attrition will vary wildly based on teh locations. Attrition in the Philippines, India, Costa Rica, etc. is very, very low because these are first world jobs. Now in Buffalo, Phoenix, and other larger cities that are a hotbed of call center, the numbers are higher. When you get to places like Arcadia, NY, El Paso, etc. they tend to fall in the middle. Teh industry makes a huge difference in the rates as well.
Regardless, you seem to think that attrition means involuntary, based on your comment about being replaced every 8 months. My guess is that vast, vast majority of these are not terminations, but voluntary. Replacing even 50% of your workforce through terminations every year would be insane, simply because of the unemployment claims you would have to manage. Do you have a number that delineates voluntary vs terms?
Last, I appreciate your distaste for Bezos and belief that making economic decisions for the whole of an area based on that personal distaste. BTW, the HQ wasn't even in her district so it wasn't about "her" constituents". But just a question, is it fair to say that you don't have an Amazon account and have never ordered from Amazon?
First, do you have any links that point to 200% attrition onshore? Is the "middle" 200% attrition as you claimed? Now you're saying the "industry" makes a huge difference as well? I thought we were discussing the "call center industry?" Without a delineation of on-shore versus off shore but go ahead, link me to onshore attrition rates since you're claiming 200% and as such the 150% attrition rate is a "so what" stat for you, ignoring that Amazon's rate is double similar businesses.
Second, I believe the article stated that the vast majority of terminations were involuntary in that the Bezos created automation and technological monitoring of productivity lead to involuntary terminations. Most states' unemployment benefits have very strict rules about collecting unemployment as it relates to "voluntary" or "involuntary" terminations, layoffs, length of service to the employer, probationary period, etc. I don't believe Amazon is "managing" some huge volume of unemployment claims as a result. And if they are, they're likely handled off-shore. I highly suggest that you read the previous Market Place article I linked and the following:
“Their business model is clearly one that’s based on treating their workers as expendable, and it’s designed with a high turnover model in mind,” said Berkowitz, who directs the National Employment Law Project’s worker health and safety program and spent six years in senior roles at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
Third, corporate tax bill? Is this a joke. Amazon didn't pay their fair share. But yea, give them more, they need it.
Amazon’s tax avoidance is consistent. Over the past three years, Amazon paid an effective federal income tax rate of just 4.3 percent on U.S. income. Over the past 10 years, Amazon’s effective federal tax rate on $57 billion of U.S. pretax income was just 4.7 percent, especially remarkable given that the legal rate was 35 percent for most of this period.
AOC's constituents live next door and would have been impacted. LIC has housing for the 10,000 employees? All 10,000 employees live in Crystal City, no impact beyond Alexandria County? C'mon man. Yea, I have personal distaste for Bezos. He's a scumbag because of his business model.
And last, no I do not have an Amazon account and refuse to buy anything from them. Ever since the brand name flat panel tv I bought in 2009 or 10 shit the bed after 3 months and Amazon refused any kind of assistance, because I didn't buy the extended warranty plan, and the manufacturer refused to honor the warranty because we purchased through a third party. I only use their web platform for researching products/pricing and then buy elsewhere. I don't need dirt cheap and instant gratification but I also tend to buy quality over price and use/wear shit until it disintegrates. And before you ask, yes, I shop at Whole Foods, mostly out of convenience. I spend way less there than I used to as their quality, selection and product offerings have gone down since Amazon bought them. Plus, they never have enough cashiers so the checkout lines are brutal and yet, haven't implemented self check out. Their employees also seem less happy to be working there as well. At least the ones that are still there. Different people behind the meat counter (the quality of their meat has really gone down), cheese counter and working the produce section, used to see the same people time and time again. I'm shopping more at indy butcher shops, farmer's markets and specialty stores as a result. Soon, I hope to avoid Whole Foods all together. I'm close.
I don't need links and I can't provide links. My company manages call centers across the country and around the world. There are absolutely locations and sites that exceed 150% annualized attrition. Not all of them, not on average, but there are examples. And sorry I can't provide the names because they are not public companies and that is confidential information. You can believe me or not believe me. I don't think I have a history of lying around here.
I'm not aware of the ability to off shore unemployment claims. You have to have a person attend a hearing, at least in the two states where my company operates. And if you are replacing jobs with technology, by definition you cannot exceed 100% attrition.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I think the elite are well aware some want to tax them more. This won't be news to them. Maybe what you say was her true intent, but it's kind of ham fisted and very likely to be used against her, just like this is being used against her. As I always say after one of her stunts "she needs to be smarter". She started her career by trying a coup against Pelosi and she continues to make silly mistakes.
She started her career by running against a long term incumbent in a dem primary. She took on Nancy and survived. And wasn’t treated like Liz Darth Cheney. Silly mistake? Her base isn’t the “elite.”
She has not accomplished anything, that I'm aware of, during her time in congress. I think she has sponsored a few bills and they didn't even get out of committee.
Name me any first or second term Congress person, from either party, who has “accomplished” anything. Further, is not voting on bills, on behalf of your constituents and not the monied elite donor class, accomplishing something? You have an odd take on representation in Congress.
She's a celebrity then, not a representative. Do the work. You can call her successful when she is successful then. I'd be curious who she motivates to vote, liberals or conservatives. I wouldn't be surprised if she motivates the right more than the left, just like MGT.
My center left representative (Spanberger) almost lost in 2020 because of the stupid "defund the police" mantra. Taht's the kind of idiocy that does NOT win elections in swing districts. She laid into Pelosi and others after the election for not shutting that down sooner.
What’s her voting record as it relates to the demographics of her district? Do the work? How much of the Green New Deal made its way into Biden’s infrastructure and tax bill? Not all “work” in Congress is measured by legislation that you sponsored or introduced getting passed. And you didn’t answer the question. Hint, it’s a rare occurrence, if it happens at all, that a first or second term congress person gets a bill they wrote passed. Her work is shifting the debate and getting folks to notice. Nancy recognizes that she’s got a future in the dem party and is a key part of the progressive coalition. AOC is no “fool.”
Hate to break it to you but any dem is a boogeyman for the repubs in their campaigns. What else is new?
No, not any dem. One that goes to a 35k gala and wears a Tax the Rich dress is unserious in my book.
And I'm not going to get into stupid debates about how many reps have sponsored successful bills in their first two terms. Are you saying that number is zero? Because I seriously doubt that is the case.
But let's pull the thread. Can you defend the attempted coup? Can you defend her pushing Amazon HQ out of NYC? I say thanks to that. We welcomed all of the new jobs here in VA. And it appears she did it because she thinks Jeff Bezos, who owns 10% of Amazon, is too rich. Or is she, a a rule, against companies moving to NYC? Idiotic in my book.
Her dress was borrowed for the event so there is that.
Her reasoning for ousting Amazon, which I understand, was it wasn't going to benefit her people.
The mere rumor of Amazon HQ2 drove real estate prices through the roof. What that was going to do to her constituents was drive rent prices up and her people out of that area.
Yes NY has rent control but if you want to renovate the building you can have the people move out until those are done. If it takes a year and a half do you really want to move back there?
Happens all the time here.
So as a rule, NYC politicians are against companies moving in, brining new job (white and blue collar) and restaurants, etc. Is the best way to control rent prices to just not have any jobs, therefore property will be cheap?
If you have lets say 200,000 people living in that area and rent becomes incontrollable and now only affluent people can live there those people have to move.
Where are they going? Their jobs and livelihood are most likely in that surrounding area. Now they get forced out. It's a form of gentrification.
The jobs aspect and taxes I can understand but that wasn't representing HER constituents so she did what the people she works for wanted.
I wanted it here for jobs and such. It would suck though to be anywhere near LIC after it would be built. That place is a nightmare now so I can only imagine what it would be like after HQ2?
Why can't any of her people work for Amazon? And yeah, gentrification happens everywhere. Is reducing an area to a slum a better option? What company is she waiting for to come in and bring the perfect mix of jobs and income, without any rent issues, etc. I don't believe in Utopia.
1- Yes they could if they still could afford to live there. 2-Yes it does. 3-The area isn't a slum. It is opposite of that. LIC is one of the fastest up and coming cities in the US which is why Amazon chose the area. 4-The building oh HQ2 would only hurt her constituents. You keep missing that part where she works for them and they are the ones whom get impacted. Not the new people flush w money who can afford to live there.
Property values literally tripled and quadrupled over night.
Now I am just defending AOC's side of it. I personally think it should have been built and let progress prevail.
I grew up visiting my grandparents in Woodside.
I tripped out after I moved back east and drove up there to visit one of my clients, Steve Madden, in the same area.
Place is odd with some areas looking the same and some very different.
For sure not slum.
Woodside was definitely not where HQ2 was going. It was going to be in the industrial area of LIC. Go 2 blocks over and you have this.
1. Their attrition rate is irrelevant to this conversation. People attrite for a million different reasons. Check the attrition rate of a call center, it's higher than 150%.
2. I read that NYT article when it came out. It's full of anecdotes. Big fucking deal. I deal with data in my world, not anecdotes.
3. Why is it bad that it's about one person? Do you think Jeff Bezos notices what happens in his corporate tax bill? They just moved on to NOVA. Wow, what a victory for AOC. She really showed them. Or should I say "him".. since it's about Jeff Bezos, not the hundreds of thousands of employees and potential employees. Demagoguery.
1. I'm sure you would appreciate being replaced every 8 months. Anecdotes? Its a business philosophy being pushed by Bezos and studied by business schools. You don't think its real? And call center turnover rates? I checked. Seems your spreading ancedotes:
Aug 17, 2021 — According to Quality Assurance and Training Connection, turnover in the call center industry averages 30% and 45%. When you lose a call center ...
Sep 30, 2020 — The average turnover rate for a call center is 30-40%, but some centers see numbers as high as 100% in a single year. Hopefully, some of this ...
Call Center Attrition averages around 32.6%. ... February 12, 2021 ... While the rate at which people leave call centers, no matter the size of the center, ...
3. AOC's victory was for her constituents. In her district. As I said, fuck Bezos.
First, the links you provided don't seem to indicate whether these are onshore, near shore or offshore numbers. Attrition will vary wildly based on teh locations. Attrition in the Philippines, India, Costa Rica, etc. is very, very low because these are first world jobs. Now in Buffalo, Phoenix, and other larger cities that are a hotbed of call center, the numbers are higher. When you get to places like Arcadia, NY, El Paso, etc. they tend to fall in the middle. Teh industry makes a huge difference in the rates as well.
Regardless, you seem to think that attrition means involuntary, based on your comment about being replaced every 8 months. My guess is that vast, vast majority of these are not terminations, but voluntary. Replacing even 50% of your workforce through terminations every year would be insane, simply because of the unemployment claims you would have to manage. Do you have a number that delineates voluntary vs terms?
Last, I appreciate your distaste for Bezos and belief that making economic decisions for the whole of an area based on that personal distaste. BTW, the HQ wasn't even in her district so it wasn't about "her" constituents". But just a question, is it fair to say that you don't have an Amazon account and have never ordered from Amazon?
First, do you have any links that point to 200% attrition onshore? Is the "middle" 200% attrition as you claimed? Now you're saying the "industry" makes a huge difference as well? I thought we were discussing the "call center industry?" Without a delineation of on-shore versus off shore but go ahead, link me to onshore attrition rates since you're claiming 200% and as such the 150% attrition rate is a "so what" stat for you, ignoring that Amazon's rate is double similar businesses.
Second, I believe the article stated that the vast majority of terminations were involuntary in that the Bezos created automation and technological monitoring of productivity lead to involuntary terminations. Most states' unemployment benefits have very strict rules about collecting unemployment as it relates to "voluntary" or "involuntary" terminations, layoffs, length of service to the employer, probationary period, etc. I don't believe Amazon is "managing" some huge volume of unemployment claims as a result. And if they are, they're likely handled off-shore. I highly suggest that you read the previous Market Place article I linked and the following:
“Their business model is clearly one that’s based on treating their workers as expendable, and it’s designed with a high turnover model in mind,” said Berkowitz, who directs the National Employment Law Project’s worker health and safety program and spent six years in senior roles at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
Third, corporate tax bill? Is this a joke. Amazon didn't pay their fair share. But yea, give them more, they need it.
Amazon’s tax avoidance is consistent. Over the past three years, Amazon paid an effective federal income tax rate of just 4.3 percent on U.S. income. Over the past 10 years, Amazon’s effective federal tax rate on $57 billion of U.S. pretax income was just 4.7 percent, especially remarkable given that the legal rate was 35 percent for most of this period.
AOC's constituents live next door and would have been impacted. LIC has housing for the 10,000 employees? All 10,000 employees live in Crystal City, no impact beyond Alexandria County? C'mon man. Yea, I have personal distaste for Bezos. He's a scumbag because of his business model.
And last, no I do not have an Amazon account and refuse to buy anything from them. Ever since the brand name flat panel tv I bought in 2009 or 10 shit the bed after 3 months and Amazon refused any kind of assistance, because I didn't buy the extended warranty plan, and the manufacturer refused to honor the warranty because we purchased through a third party. I only use their web platform for researching products/pricing and then buy elsewhere. I don't need dirt cheap and instant gratification but I also tend to buy quality over price and use/wear shit until it disintegrates. And before you ask, yes, I shop at Whole Foods, mostly out of convenience. I spend way less there than I used to as their quality, selection and product offerings have gone down since Amazon bought them. Plus, they never have enough cashiers so the checkout lines are brutal and yet, haven't implemented self check out. Their employees also seem less happy to be working there as well. At least the ones that are still there. Different people behind the meat counter (the quality of their meat has really gone down), cheese counter and working the produce section, used to see the same people time and time again. I'm shopping more at indy butcher shops, farmer's markets and specialty stores as a result. Soon, I hope to avoid Whole Foods all together. I'm close.
I don't need links and I can't provide links. My company manages call centers across the country and around the world. There are absolutely locations and sites that exceed 150% annualized attrition. Not all of them, not on average, but there are examples. And sorry I can't provide the names because they are not public companies and that is confidential information. You can believe me or not believe me. I don't think I have a history of lying around here.
I'm not aware of the ability to off shore unemployment claims. You have to have a person attend a hearing, at least in the two states where my company operates. And if you are replacing jobs with technology, by definition you cannot exceed 100% attrition.
Expound on the bold further, please?
As an industry insider, it must be possible for you to link to an industry source that backs your claim, no? No corporate secrets need be divulged. I'm not accusing you of lying, just prefer sources, and not anecdotes, when folks make counter claims and dismiss linked claims out of hand.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I think the elite are well aware some want to tax them more. This won't be news to them. Maybe what you say was her true intent, but it's kind of ham fisted and very likely to be used against her, just like this is being used against her. As I always say after one of her stunts "she needs to be smarter". She started her career by trying a coup against Pelosi and she continues to make silly mistakes.
She started her career by running against a long term incumbent in a dem primary. She took on Nancy and survived. And wasn’t treated like Liz Darth Cheney. Silly mistake? Her base isn’t the “elite.”
She has not accomplished anything, that I'm aware of, during her time in congress. I think she has sponsored a few bills and they didn't even get out of committee.
Name me any first or second term Congress person, from either party, who has “accomplished” anything. Further, is not voting on bills, on behalf of your constituents and not the monied elite donor class, accomplishing something? You have an odd take on representation in Congress.
She's a celebrity then, not a representative. Do the work. You can call her successful when she is successful then. I'd be curious who she motivates to vote, liberals or conservatives. I wouldn't be surprised if she motivates the right more than the left, just like MGT.
My center left representative (Spanberger) almost lost in 2020 because of the stupid "defund the police" mantra. Taht's the kind of idiocy that does NOT win elections in swing districts. She laid into Pelosi and others after the election for not shutting that down sooner.
What’s her voting record as it relates to the demographics of her district? Do the work? How much of the Green New Deal made its way into Biden’s infrastructure and tax bill? Not all “work” in Congress is measured by legislation that you sponsored or introduced getting passed. And you didn’t answer the question. Hint, it’s a rare occurrence, if it happens at all, that a first or second term congress person gets a bill they wrote passed. Her work is shifting the debate and getting folks to notice. Nancy recognizes that she’s got a future in the dem party and is a key part of the progressive coalition. AOC is no “fool.”
Hate to break it to you but any dem is a boogeyman for the repubs in their campaigns. What else is new?
No, not any dem. One that goes to a 35k gala and wears a Tax the Rich dress is unserious in my book.
And I'm not going to get into stupid debates about how many reps have sponsored successful bills in their first two terms. Are you saying that number is zero? Because I seriously doubt that is the case.
But let's pull the thread. Can you defend the attempted coup? Can you defend her pushing Amazon HQ out of NYC? I say thanks to that. We welcomed all of the new jobs here in VA. And it appears she did it because she thinks Jeff Bezos, who owns 10% of Amazon, is too rich. Or is she, a a rule, against companies moving to NYC? Idiotic in my book.
Her dress was borrowed for the event so there is that.
Her reasoning for ousting Amazon, which I understand, was it wasn't going to benefit her people.
The mere rumor of Amazon HQ2 drove real estate prices through the roof. What that was going to do to her constituents was drive rent prices up and her people out of that area.
Yes NY has rent control but if you want to renovate the building you can have the people move out until those are done. If it takes a year and a half do you really want to move back there?
Happens all the time here.
So as a rule, NYC politicians are against companies moving in, brining new job (white and blue collar) and restaurants, etc. Is the best way to control rent prices to just not have any jobs, therefore property will be cheap?
If you have lets say 200,000 people living in that area and rent becomes incontrollable and now only affluent people can live there those people have to move.
Where are they going? Their jobs and livelihood are most likely in that surrounding area. Now they get forced out. It's a form of gentrification.
The jobs aspect and taxes I can understand but that wasn't representing HER constituents so she did what the people she works for wanted.
I wanted it here for jobs and such. It would suck though to be anywhere near LIC after it would be built. That place is a nightmare now so I can only imagine what it would be like after HQ2?
Why can't any of her people work for Amazon? And yeah, gentrification happens everywhere. Is reducing an area to a slum a better option? What company is she waiting for to come in and bring the perfect mix of jobs and income, without any rent issues, etc. I don't believe in Utopia.
1- Yes they could if they still could afford to live there. 2-Yes it does. 3-The area isn't a slum. It is opposite of that. LIC is one of the fastest up and coming cities in the US which is why Amazon chose the area. 4-The building oh HQ2 would only hurt her constituents. You keep missing that part where she works for them and they are the ones whom get impacted. Not the new people flush w money who can afford to live there.
Property values literally tripled and quadrupled over night.
Now I am just defending AOC's side of it. I personally think it should have been built and let progress prevail.
I grew up visiting my grandparents in Woodside.
I tripped out after I moved back east and drove up there to visit one of my clients, Steve Madden, in the same area.
Place is odd with some areas looking the same and some very different.
For sure not slum.
Woodside was definitely not where HQ2 was going. It was going to be in the industrial area of LIC. Go 2 blocks over and you have this.
Yeah I know, we drove around the area and checked it out. Used to go up there quite a bit.... happy enough that the two clients I had which saw me in NYC every month are gone. (The other was based in Manhattan) Sometimes it is addition through subtraction. I do miss going up there frequently, though.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I think the elite are well aware some want to tax them more. This won't be news to them. Maybe what you say was her true intent, but it's kind of ham fisted and very likely to be used against her, just like this is being used against her. As I always say after one of her stunts "she needs to be smarter". She started her career by trying a coup against Pelosi and she continues to make silly mistakes.
She started her career by running against a long term incumbent in a dem primary. She took on Nancy and survived. And wasn’t treated like Liz Darth Cheney. Silly mistake? Her base isn’t the “elite.”
She has not accomplished anything, that I'm aware of, during her time in congress. I think she has sponsored a few bills and they didn't even get out of committee.
Name me any first or second term Congress person, from either party, who has “accomplished” anything. Further, is not voting on bills, on behalf of your constituents and not the monied elite donor class, accomplishing something? You have an odd take on representation in Congress.
She's a celebrity then, not a representative. Do the work. You can call her successful when she is successful then. I'd be curious who she motivates to vote, liberals or conservatives. I wouldn't be surprised if she motivates the right more than the left, just like MGT.
My center left representative (Spanberger) almost lost in 2020 because of the stupid "defund the police" mantra. Taht's the kind of idiocy that does NOT win elections in swing districts. She laid into Pelosi and others after the election for not shutting that down sooner.
What’s her voting record as it relates to the demographics of her district? Do the work? How much of the Green New Deal made its way into Biden’s infrastructure and tax bill? Not all “work” in Congress is measured by legislation that you sponsored or introduced getting passed. And you didn’t answer the question. Hint, it’s a rare occurrence, if it happens at all, that a first or second term congress person gets a bill they wrote passed. Her work is shifting the debate and getting folks to notice. Nancy recognizes that she’s got a future in the dem party and is a key part of the progressive coalition. AOC is no “fool.”
Hate to break it to you but any dem is a boogeyman for the repubs in their campaigns. What else is new?
No, not any dem. One that goes to a 35k gala and wears a Tax the Rich dress is unserious in my book.
And I'm not going to get into stupid debates about how many reps have sponsored successful bills in their first two terms. Are you saying that number is zero? Because I seriously doubt that is the case.
But let's pull the thread. Can you defend the attempted coup? Can you defend her pushing Amazon HQ out of NYC? I say thanks to that. We welcomed all of the new jobs here in VA. And it appears she did it because she thinks Jeff Bezos, who owns 10% of Amazon, is too rich. Or is she, a a rule, against companies moving to NYC? Idiotic in my book.
Her dress was borrowed for the event so there is that.
Her reasoning for ousting Amazon, which I understand, was it wasn't going to benefit her people.
The mere rumor of Amazon HQ2 drove real estate prices through the roof. What that was going to do to her constituents was drive rent prices up and her people out of that area.
Yes NY has rent control but if you want to renovate the building you can have the people move out until those are done. If it takes a year and a half do you really want to move back there?
Happens all the time here.
So as a rule, NYC politicians are against companies moving in, brining new job (white and blue collar) and restaurants, etc. Is the best way to control rent prices to just not have any jobs, therefore property will be cheap?
If you have lets say 200,000 people living in that area and rent becomes incontrollable and now only affluent people can live there those people have to move.
Where are they going? Their jobs and livelihood are most likely in that surrounding area. Now they get forced out. It's a form of gentrification.
The jobs aspect and taxes I can understand but that wasn't representing HER constituents so she did what the people she works for wanted.
I wanted it here for jobs and such. It would suck though to be anywhere near LIC after it would be built. That place is a nightmare now so I can only imagine what it would be like after HQ2?
Why can't any of her people work for Amazon? And yeah, gentrification happens everywhere. Is reducing an area to a slum a better option? What company is she waiting for to come in and bring the perfect mix of jobs and income, without any rent issues, etc. I don't believe in Utopia.
1- Yes they could if they still could afford to live there. 2-Yes it does. 3-The area isn't a slum. It is opposite of that. LIC is one of the fastest up and coming cities in the US which is why Amazon chose the area. 4-The building oh HQ2 would only hurt her constituents. You keep missing that part where she works for them and they are the ones whom get impacted. Not the new people flush w money who can afford to live there.
Property values literally tripled and quadrupled over night.
Now I am just defending AOC's side of it. I personally think it should have been built and let progress prevail.
I grew up visiting my grandparents in Woodside.
I tripped out after I moved back east and drove up there to visit one of my clients, Steve Madden, in the same area.
Place is odd with some areas looking the same and some very different.
For sure not slum.
Woodside was definitely not where HQ2 was going. It was going to be in the industrial area of LIC. Go 2 blocks over and you have this.
Yeah I know, we drove around the area and checked it out. Used to go up there quite a bit.... happy enough that the two clients I had which saw me in NYC every month are gone. (The other was based in Manhattan) Sometimes it is addition through subtraction. I do miss going up there frequently, though.
Were you ever in LIC before 2000? It was a much, much different place. Hookers and drugs. Think 42nd st before Gulliani cleaned it up.
1. Their attrition rate is irrelevant to this conversation. People attrite for a million different reasons. Check the attrition rate of a call center, it's higher than 150%.
2. I read that NYT article when it came out. It's full of anecdotes. Big fucking deal. I deal with data in my world, not anecdotes.
3. Why is it bad that it's about one person? Do you think Jeff Bezos notices what happens in his corporate tax bill? They just moved on to NOVA. Wow, what a victory for AOC. She really showed them. Or should I say "him".. since it's about Jeff Bezos, not the hundreds of thousands of employees and potential employees. Demagoguery.
1. I'm sure you would appreciate being replaced every 8 months. Anecdotes? Its a business philosophy being pushed by Bezos and studied by business schools. You don't think its real? And call center turnover rates? I checked. Seems your spreading ancedotes:
Aug 17, 2021 — According to Quality Assurance and Training Connection, turnover in the call center industry averages 30% and 45%. When you lose a call center ...
Sep 30, 2020 — The average turnover rate for a call center is 30-40%, but some centers see numbers as high as 100% in a single year. Hopefully, some of this ...
Call Center Attrition averages around 32.6%. ... February 12, 2021 ... While the rate at which people leave call centers, no matter the size of the center, ...
3. AOC's victory was for her constituents. In her district. As I said, fuck Bezos.
First, the links you provided don't seem to indicate whether these are onshore, near shore or offshore numbers. Attrition will vary wildly based on teh locations. Attrition in the Philippines, India, Costa Rica, etc. is very, very low because these are first world jobs. Now in Buffalo, Phoenix, and other larger cities that are a hotbed of call center, the numbers are higher. When you get to places like Arcadia, NY, El Paso, etc. they tend to fall in the middle. Teh industry makes a huge difference in the rates as well.
Regardless, you seem to think that attrition means involuntary, based on your comment about being replaced every 8 months. My guess is that vast, vast majority of these are not terminations, but voluntary. Replacing even 50% of your workforce through terminations every year would be insane, simply because of the unemployment claims you would have to manage. Do you have a number that delineates voluntary vs terms?
Last, I appreciate your distaste for Bezos and belief that making economic decisions for the whole of an area based on that personal distaste. BTW, the HQ wasn't even in her district so it wasn't about "her" constituents". But just a question, is it fair to say that you don't have an Amazon account and have never ordered from Amazon?
First, do you have any links that point to 200% attrition onshore? Is the "middle" 200% attrition as you claimed? Now you're saying the "industry" makes a huge difference as well? I thought we were discussing the "call center industry?" Without a delineation of on-shore versus off shore but go ahead, link me to onshore attrition rates since you're claiming 200% and as such the 150% attrition rate is a "so what" stat for you, ignoring that Amazon's rate is double similar businesses.
Second, I believe the article stated that the vast majority of terminations were involuntary in that the Bezos created automation and technological monitoring of productivity lead to involuntary terminations. Most states' unemployment benefits have very strict rules about collecting unemployment as it relates to "voluntary" or "involuntary" terminations, layoffs, length of service to the employer, probationary period, etc. I don't believe Amazon is "managing" some huge volume of unemployment claims as a result. And if they are, they're likely handled off-shore. I highly suggest that you read the previous Market Place article I linked and the following:
“Their business model is clearly one that’s based on treating their workers as expendable, and it’s designed with a high turnover model in mind,” said Berkowitz, who directs the National Employment Law Project’s worker health and safety program and spent six years in senior roles at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
Third, corporate tax bill? Is this a joke. Amazon didn't pay their fair share. But yea, give them more, they need it.
Amazon’s tax avoidance is consistent. Over the past three years, Amazon paid an effective federal income tax rate of just 4.3 percent on U.S. income. Over the past 10 years, Amazon’s effective federal tax rate on $57 billion of U.S. pretax income was just 4.7 percent, especially remarkable given that the legal rate was 35 percent for most of this period.
AOC's constituents live next door and would have been impacted. LIC has housing for the 10,000 employees? All 10,000 employees live in Crystal City, no impact beyond Alexandria County? C'mon man. Yea, I have personal distaste for Bezos. He's a scumbag because of his business model.
And last, no I do not have an Amazon account and refuse to buy anything from them. Ever since the brand name flat panel tv I bought in 2009 or 10 shit the bed after 3 months and Amazon refused any kind of assistance, because I didn't buy the extended warranty plan, and the manufacturer refused to honor the warranty because we purchased through a third party. I only use their web platform for researching products/pricing and then buy elsewhere. I don't need dirt cheap and instant gratification but I also tend to buy quality over price and use/wear shit until it disintegrates. And before you ask, yes, I shop at Whole Foods, mostly out of convenience. I spend way less there than I used to as their quality, selection and product offerings have gone down since Amazon bought them. Plus, they never have enough cashiers so the checkout lines are brutal and yet, haven't implemented self check out. Their employees also seem less happy to be working there as well. At least the ones that are still there. Different people behind the meat counter (the quality of their meat has really gone down), cheese counter and working the produce section, used to see the same people time and time again. I'm shopping more at indy butcher shops, farmer's markets and specialty stores as a result. Soon, I hope to avoid Whole Foods all together. I'm close.
I don't need links and I can't provide links. My company manages call centers across the country and around the world. There are absolutely locations and sites that exceed 150% annualized attrition. Not all of them, not on average, but there are examples. And sorry I can't provide the names because they are not public companies and that is confidential information. You can believe me or not believe me. I don't think I have a history of lying around here.
I'm not aware of the ability to off shore unemployment claims. You have to have a person attend a hearing, at least in the two states where my company operates. And if you are replacing jobs with technology, by definition you cannot exceed 100% attrition.
Expound on the bold further, please?
As an industry insider, it must be possible for you to link to an industry source that backs your claim, no? No corporate secrets need be divulged. I'm not accusing you of lying, just prefer sources, and not anecdotes, when folks make counter claims and dismiss linked claims out of hand.
No, I cannot. That's because we track attrition rates of all of our suppliers through disclosures and roster management. It's not a 'secret' it's confidential because these are generally private, private equity held companies. They are generally not publicly traded.
Regarding the bold, you cannot turn over more than 100% if you are automating/eliminating a job. You would not rehire another person in that same annualized period, which would have to happen to exceed 100%.
edit - I should not say 'generally' in reference to our supply chain. None of our suppliers are publicly traded and call centers (BPOs) are generally not public.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I said it was hypocritical because she was attending said event, an event strictly for the elite, so her message is tone deaf at best and to me hypocritical. She claims to be for the little people but she's attending one of the highest profile galas for the elite.
Spreading her message is fine but spreading that message while attending the Met Gala shows me she really doesn't get it.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I said it was hypocritical because she was attending said event, an event strictly for the elite, so her message is tone deaf at beast and to me hypocritical. She claims to be for the little people but she's attending one of the highest profile galas for the elite.
Spreading her message is fine but spreading that message while attending the Met Gala shows me she really doesn't get it.
disagree. we wouldn't be talking about her message today had she not done this.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I think the elite are well aware some want to tax them more. This won't be news to them. Maybe what you say was her true intent, but it's kind of ham fisted and very likely to be used against her, just like this is being used against her. As I always say after one of her stunts "she needs to be smarter". She started her career by trying a coup against Pelosi and she continues to make silly mistakes.
She started her career by running against a long term incumbent in a dem primary. She took on Nancy and survived. And wasn’t treated like Liz Darth Cheney. Silly mistake? Her base isn’t the “elite.”
She has not accomplished anything, that I'm aware of, during her time in congress. I think she has sponsored a few bills and they didn't even get out of committee.
Name me any first or second term Congress person, from either party, who has “accomplished” anything. Further, is not voting on bills, on behalf of your constituents and not the monied elite donor class, accomplishing something? You have an odd take on representation in Congress.
She's a celebrity then, not a representative. Do the work. You can call her successful when she is successful then. I'd be curious who she motivates to vote, liberals or conservatives. I wouldn't be surprised if she motivates the right more than the left, just like MGT.
My center left representative (Spanberger) almost lost in 2020 because of the stupid "defund the police" mantra. Taht's the kind of idiocy that does NOT win elections in swing districts. She laid into Pelosi and others after the election for not shutting that down sooner.
What’s her voting record as it relates to the demographics of her district? Do the work? How much of the Green New Deal made its way into Biden’s infrastructure and tax bill? Not all “work” in Congress is measured by legislation that you sponsored or introduced getting passed. And you didn’t answer the question. Hint, it’s a rare occurrence, if it happens at all, that a first or second term congress person gets a bill they wrote passed. Her work is shifting the debate and getting folks to notice. Nancy recognizes that she’s got a future in the dem party and is a key part of the progressive coalition. AOC is no “fool.”
Hate to break it to you but any dem is a boogeyman for the repubs in their campaigns. What else is new?
No, not any dem. One that goes to a 35k gala and wears a Tax the Rich dress is unserious in my book.
And I'm not going to get into stupid debates about how many reps have sponsored successful bills in their first two terms. Are you saying that number is zero? Because I seriously doubt that is the case.
But let's pull the thread. Can you defend the attempted coup? Can you defend her pushing Amazon HQ out of NYC? I say thanks to that. We welcomed all of the new jobs here in VA. And it appears she did it because she thinks Jeff Bezos, who owns 10% of Amazon, is too rich. Or is she, a a rule, against companies moving to NYC? Idiotic in my book.
Her dress was borrowed for the event so there is that.
Her reasoning for ousting Amazon, which I understand, was it wasn't going to benefit her people.
The mere rumor of Amazon HQ2 drove real estate prices through the roof. What that was going to do to her constituents was drive rent prices up and her people out of that area.
Yes NY has rent control but if you want to renovate the building you can have the people move out until those are done. If it takes a year and a half do you really want to move back there?
Happens all the time here.
So as a rule, NYC politicians are against companies moving in, brining new job (white and blue collar) and restaurants, etc. Is the best way to control rent prices to just not have any jobs, therefore property will be cheap?
If you have lets say 200,000 people living in that area and rent becomes incontrollable and now only affluent people can live there those people have to move.
Where are they going? Their jobs and livelihood are most likely in that surrounding area. Now they get forced out. It's a form of gentrification.
The jobs aspect and taxes I can understand but that wasn't representing HER constituents so she did what the people she works for wanted.
I wanted it here for jobs and such. It would suck though to be anywhere near LIC after it would be built. That place is a nightmare now so I can only imagine what it would be like after HQ2?
Why can't any of her people work for Amazon? And yeah, gentrification happens everywhere. Is reducing an area to a slum a better option? What company is she waiting for to come in and bring the perfect mix of jobs and income, without any rent issues, etc. I don't believe in Utopia.
1- Yes they could if they still could afford to live there. 2-Yes it does. 3-The area isn't a slum. It is opposite of that. LIC is one of the fastest up and coming cities in the US which is why Amazon chose the area. 4-The building oh HQ2 would only hurt her constituents. You keep missing that part where she works for them and they are the ones whom get impacted. Not the new people flush w money who can afford to live there.
Property values literally tripled and quadrupled over night.
Now I am just defending AOC's side of it. I personally think it should have been built and let progress prevail.
I grew up visiting my grandparents in Woodside.
I tripped out after I moved back east and drove up there to visit one of my clients, Steve Madden, in the same area.
Place is odd with some areas looking the same and some very different.
For sure not slum.
Woodside was definitely not where HQ2 was going. It was going to be in the industrial area of LIC. Go 2 blocks over and you have this.
Yeah I know, we drove around the area and checked it out. Used to go up there quite a bit.... happy enough that the two clients I had which saw me in NYC every month are gone. (The other was based in Manhattan) Sometimes it is addition through subtraction. I do miss going up there frequently, though.
Were you ever in LIC before 2000? It was a much, much different place. Hookers and drugs. Think 42nd st before Gulliani cleaned it up.
No, I don't recall. I did see what the changes looked like in midtown, obviously. Stayed right in my grandparents neighborhood when I was a kid and as I got older and started going I went to ballparks or Manhattan generally.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I said it was hypocritical because she was attending said event, an event strictly for the elite, so her message is tone deaf at beast and to me hypocritical. She claims to be for the little people but she's attending one of the highest profile galas for the elite.
Spreading her message is fine but spreading that message while attending the Met Gala shows me she really doesn't get it.
disagree. we wouldn't be talking about her message today had she not done this.
that's called a successful outing.
I disagree with this. Success is moving the middle, not preaching to the choir.. As someone in teh middle, she didn't move me.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I said it was hypocritical because she was attending said event, an event strictly for the elite, so her message is tone deaf at beast and to me hypocritical. She claims to be for the little people but she's attending one of the highest profile galas for the elite.
Spreading her message is fine but spreading that message while attending the Met Gala shows me she really doesn't get it.
disagree. we wouldn't be talking about her message today had she not done this.
that's called a successful outing.
I disagree with this. Success is moving the middle, not preaching to the choir.. As someone in teh middle, she didn't move me.
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I said it was hypocritical because she was attending said event, an event strictly for the elite, so her message is tone deaf at beast and to me hypocritical. She claims to be for the little people but she's attending one of the highest profile galas for the elite.
Spreading her message is fine but spreading that message while attending the Met Gala shows me she really doesn't get it.
disagree. we wouldn't be talking about her message today had she not done this.
that's called a successful outing.
I disagree with this. Success is moving the middle, not preaching to the choir.. As someone in teh middle, she didn't move me.
100%. Quite the opposite actually.
Are we now pretending that people in the middle are capable of being moved?
criticism is healthy, but it's key to understand what and why you are criticizing. I'd like to know why it's hypocritical to go to an exclusive event and promote a message to close the economic gap? that's exactly the audience you need to reach to gain those things in society, and to get people talking. talking to poor people is all fine and dandy, understanding their problems, but if you don't promote that message to the elite, you won't get anywhere.
I said it was hypocritical because she was attending said event, an event strictly for the elite, so her message is tone deaf at beast and to me hypocritical. She claims to be for the little people but she's attending one of the highest profile galas for the elite.
Spreading her message is fine but spreading that message while attending the Met Gala shows me she really doesn't get it.
disagree. we wouldn't be talking about her message today had she not done this.
that's called a successful outing.
I disagree with this. Success is moving the middle, not preaching to the choir.. As someone in teh middle, she didn't move me.
100%. Quite the opposite actually.
Are we now pretending that people in the middle are capable of being moved?
Umm yeah. Kind of the definition of us. The whole point of politics is to convince the unconvinced.
Comments
Regardless, you seem to think that attrition means involuntary, based on your comment about being replaced every 8 months. My guess is that vast, vast majority of these are not terminations, but voluntary. Replacing even 50% of your workforce through terminations every year would be insane, simply because of the unemployment claims you would have to manage. Do you have a number that delineates voluntary vs terms?
Last, I appreciate your distaste for Bezos and belief that making economic decisions for the whole of an area based on that personal distaste. BTW, the HQ wasn't even in her district so it wasn't about "her" constituents". But just a question, is it fair to say that you don't have an Amazon account and have never ordered from Amazon?
2-Yes it does.
3-The area isn't a slum. It is opposite of that. LIC is one of the fastest up and coming cities in the US which is why Amazon chose the area.
4-The building oh HQ2 would only hurt her constituents. You keep missing that part where she works for them and they are the ones whom get impacted. Not the new people flush w money who can afford to live there.
Property values literally tripled and quadrupled over night.
Now I am just defending AOC's side of it. I personally think it should have been built and let progress prevail.
Or
I keep raising the rent the max that I can every year until it's too much for you.
New jobs are good, I mentioned that I think it should have been built. If I was living in that area in a lower income apartment I would have been worried sick on what would happen next.
She also wasn't the only reason HQ2 wasn't built. There was someone in Albany that was never going to let that happen. I have to go back and look up his name.
In reality AOC wasn't the little engine that could. She wasn't David in this. She had a part and was given the bigger stage for it though.
Dem Rep Maloney Hits Back at AOC’s Opposition to Amazon HQ2: ‘It Used to Be That We Would Protest Wa
Friday on CNN’s “OutFront,” Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) reacted to Amazon’s decision to pull out of an agreement to build its second headquarters in New York City.
The decision was heralded by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), but Maloney questioned that opposition.
Partial transcript as follows:
BURNETT: I want to ask you about another big story tonight, Amazon, abruptly canceling plans to build, it would be a massive headquarters in New York. People like your colleague Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have been celebrating this. You’ve seen this from some several progressives. She said, “Today was the day a group of dedicated everyday New Yorkers defeated Amazon’s corporate greed, its worker exploitation, and the power of the richest man in the world.”
It’s your district, not hers, now is that how you see it?
MALONEY: Absolutely. My constituents want jobs.
BURNETT: This was 25,000 job.
MALONEY: Twenty minimum, it would have been many, many more, 25,000 jobs at 150,000 minimum for the for the job. Many entry-level jobs would have been – many, many more they were working with the community on job fairs and the other types of entry-level jobs that they would have. There were promises for a new school and having – as a former teacher. I was intrigued with their plans to have a curriculum in 30 different schools supported by Amazon on high-tech.
We should be really diversifying our base of taxes, our base of businesses. We’re too dependent on financial services. And it used to be that we would protest wars. Now we’re protesting jobs. People are complaining about jobs coming to your – this is the best – let me tell you, Erin, if this had gone through, it would have made overnight New York City the high-tech capital of the East Coast. The most important job center for tech jobs.
And as a former member of the City Council, I have worked through several mayors in trying to figure out how to diversify our economy. We’ve been investing in high-tech schools, ones on my district, Cornell Tech to train the next geniuses in tech. Now, we would have had a place for them to go to work. But Amazon …
BURNETT: But you don’t because the progressives in your own party, including people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who get so much attention now. They stopped it.
MALONEY: Well, I’m a progressive too, but I’m pragmatic. If someone is going to bring a job to my district, to my city and billions of dollars in tax revenue, you also had a story this week that we were $3 billion under projected revenues for the state and roughly $1 billion under projected, this is the first quarter, we’re $4 billion less than we usually get and yet we’re kicking out a company that would have been paid – they were projecting over 10 years roughly $27 billion in taxes and not to mention the economic activity, the small businesses were thrilled because there would be more activity.
I am disappointed. It used to be if you wanted to change something you worked with the contract to change it. You didn’t just take them out.
BURNETT: No, they probably said they didn’t talk to them.
MALONEY: I know. They just said, “We don’t want it.” And they are demonstrating and against it, and it’s jobs, it’s jobs, I’ve never seen anything like this. Most of the time people are trying to figure out and spending most of their time trying to figure out how to bring jobs to New York and to keep them here.
Second, I believe the article stated that the vast majority of terminations were involuntary in that the Bezos created automation and technological monitoring of productivity lead to involuntary terminations. Most states' unemployment benefits have very strict rules about collecting unemployment as it relates to "voluntary" or "involuntary" terminations, layoffs, length of service to the employer, probationary period, etc. I don't believe Amazon is "managing" some huge volume of unemployment claims as a result. And if they are, they're likely handled off-shore. I highly suggest that you read the previous Market Place article I linked and the following:
Amazon’s turnover rate amid pandemic is at least double the average for retail and warehousing industries | The Seattle Times
From the above:
“Their business model is clearly one that’s based on treating their workers as expendable, and it’s designed with a high turnover model in mind,” said Berkowitz, who directs the National Employment Law Project’s worker health and safety program and spent six years in senior roles at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
Third, corporate tax bill? Is this a joke. Amazon didn't pay their fair share. But yea, give them more, they need it.
Amazon’s tax avoidance is consistent. Over the past three years, Amazon paid an effective federal income tax rate of just 4.3 percent on U.S. income. Over the past 10 years, Amazon’s effective federal tax rate on $57 billion of U.S. pretax income was just 4.7 percent, especially remarkable given that the legal rate was 35 percent for most of this period.
Amazon Has Record-Breaking Profits in 2020, Avoids $2.3 Billion in Federal Income Taxes – ITEP
AOC's constituents live next door and would have been impacted. LIC has housing for the 10,000 employees? All 10,000 employees live in Crystal City, no impact beyond Alexandria County? C'mon man. Yea, I have personal distaste for Bezos. He's a scumbag because of his business model.
And last, no I do not have an Amazon account and refuse to buy anything from them. Ever since the brand name flat panel tv I bought in 2009 or 10 shit the bed after 3 months and Amazon refused any kind of assistance, because I didn't buy the extended warranty plan, and the manufacturer refused to honor the warranty because we purchased through a third party. I only use their web platform for researching products/pricing and then buy elsewhere. I don't need dirt cheap and instant gratification but I also tend to buy quality over price and use/wear shit until it disintegrates. And before you ask, yes, I shop at Whole Foods, mostly out of convenience. I spend way less there than I used to as their quality, selection and product offerings have gone down since Amazon bought them. Plus, they never have enough cashiers so the checkout lines are brutal and yet, haven't implemented self check out. Their employees also seem less happy to be working there as well. At least the ones that are still there. Different people behind the meat counter (the quality of their meat has really gone down), cheese counter and working the produce section, used to see the same people time and time again. I'm shopping more at indy butcher shops, farmer's markets and specialty stores as a result. Soon, I hope to avoid Whole Foods all together. I'm close.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I'm not aware of the ability to off shore unemployment claims. You have to have a person attend a hearing, at least in the two states where my company operates. And if you are replacing jobs with technology, by definition you cannot exceed 100% attrition.
As an industry insider, it must be possible for you to link to an industry source that backs your claim, no? No corporate secrets need be divulged. I'm not accusing you of lying, just prefer sources, and not anecdotes, when folks make counter claims and dismiss linked claims out of hand.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Sometimes it is addition through subtraction.
I do miss going up there frequently, though.
Regarding the bold, you cannot turn over more than 100% if you are automating/eliminating a job. You would not rehire another person in that same annualized period, which would have to happen to exceed 100%.
edit - I should not say 'generally' in reference to our supply chain. None of our suppliers are publicly traded and call centers (BPOs) are generally not public.
Spreading her message is fine but spreading that message while attending the Met Gala shows me she really doesn't get it.
that's called a successful outing.
www.headstonesband.com
Stayed right in my grandparents neighborhood when I was a kid and as I got older and started going I went to ballparks or Manhattan generally.