I have no doubt that a certain portion of workers benefitted from the new policy while some portion of workers did not. It is too early for anyone to judge the policy without the numbers being published from Amazon. My issue with the article is that it presents a single story of a person who was hurt by the policy and extrapolate that to be the overall tone at Amazon. This article relies on sensational and emotional aspects of one story, rather than facts and statistics.
I really thought this was going to be a case of someone who spent years getting raises up to $15 an hour was having a fit because now everyone makes as much.<p>OK, so the complaint is a little more legitimate than that. But whenever you overhaul a system, some people gain, some people lose. Could amazon afford to raise wages and keep legacy programs around? Probably. Do they have to? No. And if Amazon is crippled by an exodus of workers then we'll learn something. And the way I hear it, unemployment is really low, seems like a workers job market to me.