Yep, there needs to be real consequences. In addition, no member of that board or executive team should be able to act in those positions in any company for like 5 yrs.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 57 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They should be in prison.

[–] ProdigiousWumpus@kbin.social 27 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That would be a very effective way to keep them out of those positions.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Can you not be on a company board from prison?

[–] Fades@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The rich and powerful don’t live by the same set of laws, so there won’t be. Best they can do is a slap on the wrist with no further impact.

Amazon has remained untouched from their price fixing, AmazonBasic product rip offs, union busting, poor worker conditions, etc.

This too shall pass uneventfully

[–] jaspersgroove@lemm.ee 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Corporation - n.

An ingenious method for securing individual profit without individual responsibility.

Ambrose Bierce, The Devil’s Dictionary

[–] kool_newt@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

Damn you for being exactly right!

[–] EnderMB@lemmy.world 30 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Honestly, I don't think the company needs to be dissolved, but I think that accountability for the law should exist at director level and up. For a company the size of Amazon, that's probably around 100 people that should face the consequences - and that's only the retail org.

The best description of Amazon is that it is a management company. It's not a retailer, or a tech company. It's output is its management process, and it's this that it uses to build products in different markets.

So, remove the source of those processes. Let people move up to higher roles, and let someone not breaking the law take the senior positions.

[–] Wermhatswormhat@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yeah but then how would I be able to get that napkin holder that I ordered in my underwear delivered tomorrow! You don’t understand how much I need this thing right now even though I can’t be bothered to get dressed and drive my ass to the store.

[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

How about if the company is so large and sewn into the fabric of the modern world then instead of dissolving the company it instantly becomes a public utility, turn the shares into treasury bonds, and jail the executives?

[+] opp@lemmy.world -11 points 2 years ago (4 children)

I don't really see any other company building massive warehouses that employs millions of underserved people and providing them with decent paying jobs with good benefits. I don't think 1.6million Americans should be unemployed because of shady actions of the execs.

[–] lmaydev@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yeah because Amazon kills off all the competition.

[–] opp@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

It wasn't necessarily Amazon that killed of the competition, it's the tech behind Amazon (e-commerce) that killed retail stores. Just like UBER demolished the taxi industry, just like cars replaced horse carriages, and just like AI's about to make knowledge workers completely obsolete. Amazon still has a great deal of competition from Walmart, Target, and lots of retailers.

[–] lmaydev@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They also killed a huge amount of e-commerce sites with their sheer size. This isn't really about tech more about their monopoly.

[–] opp@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Shopify accounts for 1/3 of all e-commerce sales in the US in 2023, and with the rise of way cheaper Chinese alternatives to amazon like shien, Temu, & Alibaba express no one really has a monopolistic control in the e-commerce space.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

People are still fling to buy shit. Maybe they have to do it locally instead? Probably some other company would step up to replace their monopoly. It's only be an improvement.

[–] opp@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So we should just make almost 2 million Americans unemployed because some execs shredded some papers. I don't know if you know anything about retail work, but they pay less than Amazon does, very few actually pay over $15 an hour, Walmart starts you out at $12 an hour.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 years ago

If Amazon were broken up it'd create more jobs. Sure, they may pay less, but Amazon has centralized a lot of work to increase efficiency.

We shouldn't break them up just because they shredded some papers. There are many more reasons than that.

[–] repungnant_canary@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't think forcing people to work in inhumane conditions while paying them close to nothing, so that they still need to use food stamps, counts as employing. It sounds more like exploiting the most vulnerable people, which have no other employment option, because big monopolies like Amazon killed all the competition

[–] zbyte64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 years ago

It's a myth that corporations are job creators. Their very premise is that they can do the same job for less because they have fewer labor costs.

[–] BloodSlut@lemmy.world 120 points 2 years ago (2 children)

wow, turns out that telling criminals that youre going to be looking for evidence in a few months isn't actually a good idea. who could have guessed?

[–] TheOhNoNotAgain@lemmy.world 30 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

If you have the list of all documents before and after, you let the defendant do the discovery for you

[–] massive_bereavement@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago

If you have some drugs in your home, police will do a no-knock raid.

If you steal billions, they let you know months in advance and also adapt to your schedule.

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 96 points 2 years ago (1 children)

of course they did, the penalty for getting caught destroying evidence is far, far less than the penalty for the price fixing they're accused of. the law is designed to incentivize them to do this.

we could make it so that the penalty for destroying evidence in a court case once its been subpoenaed is twice the penalty of the original case, but we don't. we could make CEOs responsible for the actions of their employees (after all, they're quick to claim responsibility for the actions of their employees when those actions generate money), but we don't.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago

It's not though. It usually laxed but generally rules of procedure allow a judge to accept spoliation as proof of the crime they're accused of.

[–] Gork@lemm.ee 34 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I will only be surprised if someone actually ends up going to prison. More likely, the company will just get hit with a fine that's just the cost of doing business.

Although Romney said, "Corporations are people too, my friend" you can't throw Amazon in jail.

Closest they can do is a forced break up. A "Ma Bell" so to speak 🔔

[–] InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

I am sure they hired a fall guy.

[–] Coasting0942@reddthat.com 3 points 2 years ago

Amazon now has to direct all managers watch a data retention video every year for the next five years, is allowed two years to roll this out, and can appeal in 3 years.

[–] barrbaric@hexbear.net 20 points 2 years ago

Just behead them all and be done with it, we know they're guilty.

[–] MuuuaadDib@lemm.ee 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Seems like that would be illegal and they should be on trial. I wonder if I went into Amazon and started to destroy a PC or two would I be held accountable?

[–] Gestrid@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

Not if you destroy the evidence that you destroyed a PC! /s

[–] UlyssesT@hexbear.net 12 points 2 years ago

lord-bezos-amused