As Amazon's robot ranks swell, workers worry about their future

[midian182]

A hot potato: Amazon has long insisted that the advanced robots being introduced to its warehouses aren't meant to replace humans. But believing that claim isn't easy when the number of machines deployed in its facilities has more than doubled over the last few years.

Amazon's use of robots in its fulfillment centers and warehouses goes back more than a decade, but it really started ramping up the numbers in recent times, from 350,000 robots in 2021 to more than 750,000 by June 2023.

It's not just the number of robots Amazon is introducing that's worrying workers; it's their human-like design. In October last year, the tech giant announced Digit, a 5-foot 9-inch 143-pound robot from Agility Robotics, was being deployed to warehouses. The two-legged machine can walk forward, backward, and sideways; squat and bend; and move, grasp, and handle items using its arm/hand-like clasps. Basically, it can imitate almost everything that a human can do, and without needing to pee in a bottle or take time off for stress.

There have been plenty of regular, non-human-like robots added to Amazon warehouses, too, including the Roomba-esque Sequoia, the fully autonomous Proteus, a robotic arm called Sparrow, and more, each more advanced than the last in terms of design and the software behind them.

Amazon likes to assure employees that their jobs are safe following the introduction of a new robot model. They're supposedly in place to do the monotonous, repetitive, and dangerous jobs instead of humans and are designed to work alongside people, not replace them. Stefano La Rovere, Amazon's director of global robotics, mechatronics, and sustainable packaging, said that advanced modern tech will merely enhance workers' roles and create new job categories. He claimed that 700 new categories of jobs have already been created through the use of this technology.

Damion Shelton, CEO of Agility Robotics, didn't seem as concerned about alleviating job-loss fears. In December, he said that the health of businesses using these robots was far more dire than any perceived fears about job replacement. Amazon, incidentally, has a nearly $2 trillion market cap and its annual gross profit for 2023 was more than $270 billion.

Like virtually every other tech firm, Amazon has been cutting jobs this year. CEO Andy Jassy said last month that the company isn't done with lowering costs as it embraces not only robots but also that other "this will help and not replace people, honest" technology: generative AI. Jassy believes the tech will be as big as the cloud and as important as the advent of the internet.

Permalink to story:

As Amazon's robot ranks swell, workers worry about their future

 

[hahahanoobs]

Most workers are bots anyway, so...

 

[Lew Zealand]

Train to be a tech to fix the robots. Props to you if you can fix as well as McD's does with their ice cream machines.

 

[VaRmeNsI]

First they complain about working there now they complain about not being able to, make up your minds.

 

[pcnthuziast]

When the working class is no longer of any utility or viable as a resource, to the ruling class, because AI and automation have nullified the need for low level human labor, what happens next? Do you think the ruling class will arbitrarily try to create purpose for them or take care of them? Seems unlikely. More likely the once useful masses will be seen as a burden and a nuisance.

 

[dirtyferret]

Train to be a tech to fix the robots. Props to you if you can fix as well as McD's does with their ice cream machines.

until they train other robots to do that as well

First they complain about working there now they complain about not being able to, make up your minds.

They complained about not beaning treated humanely by Amazon so Amazon just replaces them with non-humans

 

[dirtyferret]

When the working class is no longer of any utility or viable as a resource, to the ruling class, because AI and automation have nullified the need for low level human labor, what happens next? Do you think the ruling class will arbitrarily try to create purpose for them or take care of them? Seems unlikely. More likely the once useful masses will be seen as a burden and a nuisance.

That's crazy talk. The rich helped everyone by creating trickle down economics that has worked...will work...may work to help people achieve the American dream...being born into debt and not owning a single position while continuously making payments on subscriptions to life's necessities (or at least the necessities the rich own).

 

[pcnthuziast]

That's crazy talk. The rich helped everyone by creating trickle down economics that has worked...will work...may work to help people achieve the American dream...being born into debt and not owning a single position while continuously making payments on subscriptions to life's necessities (or at least the necessities the rich own).

You have far too much faith in human nature.

 

[dirtyferret]

You have far too much faith in human nature.

if only we can overcome our human nature and be more humane to one another

 

[Nelson28]

Amazon keeps saying robots won't replace people but their actions say otherwise. This doesn't sound good for warehouse workers.

 

[amghwk]

As an employer, robots are much more dependable than humans. They don't complain, don't nitpick, don't steal your money, on time, and don't need to worry about faking sickness and sending unwarranted medical certs, don't need to worry about pensions or retirement benefits. Of course, we then still need to employ humans or hire their services to fix and maintain these robots.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

It sucks, but one cannot understate it, warehouse work is a low skill, low wage job. Amazon is on the top of the pay scale. It's incredibly repetitive and standardized within a facility, a prime target for automation.

If you work in one of these facilities, get off your but and learn a skill. Learn to weld, or run pipe, or drive a forklift, become a painter. Do SOMETHING.

until they train other robots to do that as well

Diagnosing and repairing a robot is FAR more complicated then "pick up box and move here".

They complained about not beaning treated humanely by Amazon so Amazon just replaces them with non-humans

They complained yet kept going back to Amazon. There's plenty of warehouse work out there and none of them can keep people around.

When the working class is no longer of any utility or viable as a resource, to the ruling class, because AI and automation have nullified the need for low level human labor, what happens next? Do you think the ruling class will arbitrarily try to create purpose for them or take care of them? Seems unlikely. More likely the once useful masses will be seen as a burden and a nuisance.

They're already working on it. Why do you think they incentivize people to live hedonistic lifestyles instead of having kids? Incentivize people to destroy their families are "discover their true healing journey" BS? Why they push unhealthy food and video games and socially isolating cult behavior?

The birth rate is already below replacement, and its still dropping. At any point, they can close the border and the low skill labor market will sort itself out in just a few years. We already have employee shortages even with millions of Asylum Seekers.

In 50 years, if robots are good enough, there will be no need for a revolution. The poor and uneducated will wither to such a small population they cannot accomplish anything of note. If they DO try? Well we have those fun new smart meters to shut down your water supply and electricity and heat remotely.

 

[seeprime]

You have far too much faith in human nature.

I think the comment was sarcastic. Reagan's tax law changes, in the 80s, allowed millionaires to morph into billionaires. The middle class income has only gone up about tenfold days since then, not one thousand fold. Indeed, trickle down was a lie.

 

[p51d007]

When the working class is no longer of any utility or viable as a resource, to the ruling class, because AI and automation have nullified the need for low level human labor, what happens next? Do you think the ruling class will arbitrarily try to create purpose for them or take care of them? Seems unlikely. More likely the once useful masses will be seen as a burden and a nuisance.

Watch the movie "In Time". After the age of 25, people stop aging, but die after one year, unless they build up "time credits" to continue to live.

 

[Watzupken]

As an employer, robots are much more dependable than humans. They don't complain, don't nitpick, don't steal your money, on time, and don't need to worry about faking sickness and sending unwarranted medical certs, don't need to worry about pensions or retirement benefits. Of course, we then still need to employ humans or hire their services to fix and maintain these robots.

It depends. In theory, they are more “dependable”. But they are not free of problems. As an employer, you have less problem around handling complaints, harassment, etc. In terms of cost, I do wonder how much money can the company save. These are power hungry robots, and the cost of maintenance and repair is going to be high. Not to mention the cost of buying 1 itself is not going to be cheap. So I doubt there is substantial savings, if any.

 

[GodisanAtheist]

I mean no one, I mean *no one*, believes companies would not replace people with bots the first chance they get.

Employees are the most expensive parts of any organization, and they have even more employee overhead with management and admin and HR staff.

Bots will need technical repair and maintenance, a company with a good proactive maintenance schedule will keep downtime and cost to minimum, just like any company with a semi functional IT/Help desk group.

What will be funny is to see these same companies trapped by the same enshitification schemes that have been hoisted on everyone else. Their initially affordable automated workforce will become more expensive to replace and the Maintenance As A Service contracts will get pricier until someone will have the revolutionary idea that the total cost of hiring a person is actually cheaper than all the inflated costs of their robots and...

 

[ScottSoapbox]

The backhoe operator replaced a bunch of guys with shovels.

The operator made more money doing better work.
The company saved money.
The shovel people were freed up to be productive elsewhere in society raising the total productivity.

Don't shake your fist at the backhoe, find a better skill than lifting a shovel (or, in this case, putting things in boxes).

 

[ScottSoapbox]

I mean no one, I mean *no one*, believes companies would not replace people with bots the first chance they get.

Employees are the most expensive parts of any organization, and they have even more employee overhead with management and admin and HR staff.

Bots will need technical repair and maintenance, a company with a good proactive maintenance schedule will keep downtime and cost to minimum, just like any company with a semi functional IT/Help desk group.

What will be funny is to see these same companies trapped by the same enshitification schemes that have been hoisted on everyone else. Their initially affordable automated workforce will become more expensive to replace and the Maintenance As A Service contracts will get pricier until someone will have the revolutionary idea that the total cost of hiring a person is actually cheaper than all the inflated costs of their robots and...

What's funny is that you think a company buying an army of robots is unable to put together a long-term cost-benefit analysis spreadsheet.

 

[Uncle Al]

Sounds like a good motivation for all of their plants to unionize and once done, restrict the number of bots that can be employed OR for every worker displaced, Amazon must pay them salary for the rest of their lives ....

 

[Neatfeatguy]

As long as Amazon isn't firing workforce and replacing them with robots, technically they are doing like they said they would do, "the advanced robots being introduced to its warehouses aren't meant to replace humans."

Even if they do not hire more people to work these positions and only put robots in to work them they are still upholding their idea that the robots are not replacing humans. You can't replace something that wasn't there to begin with. So if a person wasn't holding that job that a robot was put into, the robot technically wasn't replacing a human's job.

 

[dirtyferret]

Sounds like a good motivation for all of their plants to unionize and once done, restrict the number of bots that can be employed OR for every worker displaced, Amazon must pay them salary for the rest of their lives ....

Amazon spends $14 million per year for "consultants" to prevent unions.

"Amazon held numerous anti-union meetings that workers were required to attend and plastered “vote no” posters at its warehouses — both common tactics. A federal judge ruled in January that Amazon violated labor laws by threatening to withhold wage increases if workers voted to form a union."

https://thehill.com/business/393144...lion-on-labor-consultants-in-anti-union-push/

 

[slowhand]

We'll be replaced by robots, deep in debt, no job and we'll have to accept everything that government say because universal basic income, social score and co2 tax, so people will enslave themselves by saying this is all conspiracy until they are caught in the web

 

[toooooot]

Amazon spends $14 million per year for "consultants" to prevent unions.

"Amazon held numerous anti-union meetings that workers were required to attend and plastered “vote no” posters at its warehouses — both common tactics. A federal judge ruled in January that Amazon violated labor laws by threatening to withhold wage increases if workers voted to form a union."

https://thehill.com/business/393144...lion-on-labor-consultants-in-anti-union-push/

I am waiting on a scientific comprehensive study that would once and for all answer if unions have a positive outcome in a long run or the opposite.
If a job can be transferred to another country, it goes there, good bye unions and jobs. But if it can't like many medical jobs for example, employees unionize.
We need final answer.

 

[dirtyferret]

I am waiting on a scientific comprehensive study that would once and for all answer if unions have a positive outcome in a long run or the opposite.
If a job can be transferred to another country, it goes there, good bye unions and jobs. But if it can't like many medical jobs for example, employees unionize.
We need final answer.

It really depends where you are coming from. I'm not going to say unions are perfect, they clearly have there drawbacks but they absolutely help the workers in creating better wages which helps the economy in spending. They also have an immediate impact in the value of the company as it decreases their public value (stock price). We also know that rich people horde money rather then spend it. Trickle down economics is a joke and George Bush (the guy with the economics degree from Yale) aptly named it voodoo economics.

So if you believe a strong middle class is beneficial for the economy, most people do, than unions do help.
If you believe the economy is just the S&P number than you would be against them.

That said the economy is more than just unions, you also have other issues such as large companies monopolizing their segments and preventing competition which has a major impact on jobs, prices, inflation, etc.,