Amazon planning second headquarters with 50,000 jobs

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

The RFP acts as a huge political tool for the company across the US right now, I have no doubt the major Republican politicians are being told 'well we would look at Wisconsin Mr Ryan' or 'Kentucky is high on our list of possibilities Senator McConnell' 'except for this immigration issue we are having with the Presidents future plans'
The company will stretch this 'decision' out for the full 3 years left of the Trump Presidency'.

Kentucky already got the Amazon air cargo hub this year.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money...-hub/97354612/

Amazon will add 2,700 jobs at new $1.5B Kentucky hub

In the end, the state, Boone County and the airport moved quickly to lock in Amazon, which will receive a $40 million state and local tax incentive and another $5 million from the airport. For its part, Amazon has promised 2,700 new jobs, 600 of which will be full-time. It has entered a lease of at least 50 years with CVG, where Amazon plans to build a hub every bit as impressive as DHL's massive North American hub here.




I don't disagree they know where they want to go and have a shortlist, but the political play here is 'what level(s) of government will give us the best deal to move where they want us.'

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Kentucky already got the Amazon air cargo hub this year.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money...-hub/97354612/

Amazon will add 2,700 jobs at new $1.5B Kentucky hub

In the end, the state, Boone County and the airport moved quickly to lock in Amazon, which will receive a $40 million state and local tax incentive and another $5 million from the airport. For its part, Amazon has promised 2,700 new jobs, 600 of which will be full-time. It has entered a lease of at least 50 years with CVG, where Amazon plans to build a hub every bit as impressive as DHL's massive North American hub here.






I don't disagree they know where they want to go and have a shortlist, but the political play here is 'what level(s) of government will give us the best deal to move where they want us.'

I think its such a massive size they get huge leverage for all kinds of political issues they have

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

After reading the NYT article about Amazon's work culture, it's pretty clear it would not be a good fit for this city. Sure, Calgary has a lot (for a smaller city) of skilled and tech-savvy workers. But those workers are accustomed to a corporate culture that could scarcely be more different from Amazon's. With its flex days, generous vacation, flex hours, maternity and paternity leave, and informal workplace atmosphere, Calgary's oil patch culture came about because of a severe worker shortages. Companies bent over backwards to make themselves as attractive as possible to employees, and so created one of the more employee-focused and agreeable workplace environments around.

Calgary's cushy O/G culture is in many ways the outlier, not the norm. With the world trending the way it is, it's probably an industry whose workforce will have to adapt to a leaner way of doing business, without or without Amazon.

[nik-]

afc, what are your thoughts on whether or not this is a political move by Amazon?

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by nik-

afc, what are your thoughts on whether or not this is a political move by Amazon?

I have no doubt this is almost entirely political, doesn't mean they don't need a second headquarters, but the timing, the whole RFP part is all pure politics.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I think its such a massive size they get huge leverage for all kinds of political issues they have

There's still only so much that can be done at the federal level, this is about sticking states, counties and cities against each other in a bidding war since that's where the money can be saved. If they wanted to make it a federal issue I'd expect them to take some long looks at Canadian proposals early on.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

After reading the NYT article about Amazon's work culture, it's pretty clear it would not be a good fit for this city. Sure, Calgary has a lot (for a smaller city) of skilled and tech-savvy workers. But those workers are accustomed to a corporate culture that could scarcely be more different from Amazon's. With its flex days, generous vacation, flex hours, maternity and paternity leave, and informal workplace atmosphere, Calgary's oil patch culture came about because of a severe worker shortages. Companies bent over backwards to make themselves as attractive as possible to employees, and so created one of the more employee-focused and agreeable workplace environments around.

Work shortages may have lead to companies going above and beyond to attract staff, but to suggest that the same workers who saw the not so cushy side of the O&G corporate culture during the downturn are under the delusion that emloyers will always go above and beyond for them to the point where they won't work at a place that offers any less seems like a bit of a stretch.

Alberta has had some of the worst employment standards in the country for some time, there are plenty of workers who do not to expect a lot. I'm actually interested to know what you felt put the oil and gas industry culture above others. You listed things like generous vacation and maternity leave. How great was the vacation entitlement and since when were maternity leave rights revoked from all other places of employment? I wonder if people think flex days and an informal environment were worth the price having zero job security.

Amazon is the opposite. I doubt there are enough highly skilled, ferociously competitive workaholics in this city to fill 10 per cent of the positions. And Amazon churns through employees at an incredible rate, with most lasting only a year. Where are the replacements going to come from for that rate of attrition? Amazon isn't going to want to pay for expensive international relocation for thousands of positions a year. A city in the population and education dense northeast U.S. makes far more sense.

I hear a lot or examples(admittedly only from posters on this site) of workers who are having to do the work of their laid off former coworkers for less money than they were earning before. Seems like we have a lot of go getters and a lot of people who are looking for work. I think you'd be surprised at the number of employers operating in Calgary who have a revolving door when it comes to employees, Amazon would have no issue finding employees in this markets and retention issues would likely be the same as at any other company that operates with their business model in Calgary.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

This was made public because it is primarily a political decision. Sure, the logistics are important, but it will mostly come down to which city wants it the most and is willing to cut them the best deal.

Okay, this we can agree upon. This is about extracting the best deal possible from any government, no doubt. And yes, this is very political. So how do you think it is going to sell in the United States if Amazon sends 50,000 jobs to Canada to service the greater United States? I think it needs to be made abundantly clear that Amazon generates 66% of its worldwide revenues from the United States. Canada falls into the "rest of the world slice," accounting for only 6.9% of revenues.



So recognizing this, how is that going to play politically in the United States?

So it is entirely reasonable to discuss Calgary as a possible destination, because Calgary has two things that make it potentially hungry enough to make an aggressive bid: high current unemployment, and a need to diversify the economy.

I disagree. This is like saying its reasonable to discuss the possibility for Calgary to host the summer Olympics or the World Cup. Sure, there is an incredibly small chance that it could happen, but you would have to ignore so many factors to have the discussion it is just pure fantasy. The odds are so stacked against that outcome.

Yes, Calgary should bid for it. They would be insane not to buy a ticket on this lottery. Who doesn't buy a ticket when the lottery is over $500M? But they should also be realistic in the chances of this happening and not invest a lot of time or money in the process. It would be wonderful to address the current unemployment situation, and diversify the economy, but maybe they should take some baby steps first, and not shoot for the moon?

Calgary has the youngest and most highly educated populace in Canada. And considering that Canada is better educated than the US in the aggregate, I think it is safe to assume that Calgary would compare favourably to most US cities in that regard as well.

According to StatsCan Calgary is third in the country.

"Among the six largest CMAs (Toronto, Montréal, Vancouver, Ottawa#-#Gatineau, Calgary and Edmonton), Ottawa#-#Gatineau had the largest proportion of adults with a university degree at 38.2%, followed by Toronto at#36.8%#and Calgary at 34.8%. Ottawa#-#Gatineau had the largest proportion of adults with a university degree among#all CMAs."

That 34.8% rate is indeed impressive. Is it that much different from a US city, like Dallas/Ft. Worth? Just a hair more actually. DFW comes in at 32% of the population with a bachelor's degree or better, and depending on the part of the metro area, that can go as high as 84%. But as a whole, we'll go with 32% for working numbers.

StatsCan says that Calgary has 874,000 people between the ages of 15 and 65. So that would mean Calgary has roughly 304,000 people with a bachelors degree.

For comparison, DFW has 4,806,700 people between the ages of 15 and 65. So that would put the number of people with a bachelor's degree or better in the neighborhood of 1,538,144, or over five times as many as Calgary. That's actually more people than population of Calgary.

On the age thing, Calgary's median age is 36.4, versus the DFW median of 34.7, not that I think this matters in any way.

Also, Calgary is in the unique position that much of its well educated workforce is currently unemployed. Typically, the unemployed ranks are dominated by the unskilled and poorly educated. But Calgary currently has an army of engineers, professionals, and well trained people out of work. I doubt there is another city in NA in a comparable situation.

You think Calgary is the only city with an unemployment or under-employment problem? The United States tracks underemployment statistics and it is currently sitting at 14%. Not only that, half of US workers consider themselves underemployed.

As for your rebuttal (New Era) that the workforce is mostly in one industry, and thus its this just illustrates your personal bias to mold the facts to your own narrative. You yourself have argued as loudly as anyone on these threads that Alberta needs to diversify the economy. This is precisely what the Amazon opportunity would be about. Also, regardless of the fact that there are large fluctuations in demand for labour in Calgary because of the volatile nature of the O&G industry, the fact of the matter is that the availability does exist at the moment. And that's the important thing, no?

I have been very vocal in stating that Alberta should diversify its economy. Is this the brass right to be grabbing for to fix that problem? Or should Alberta look internally and grow their own solution? As I said, it doesn't hurt to reach out and voice interest, but it is also reasonable to recognize your chances and consider how you want to invest your time and energy. There are better opportunities out there that can help diversify the economy while encouraging consumers to use Alberta's primary driver of the economy.

The idea that Calgary would look at this as on opportunity to diversify the economy, and thus might have the motivation to bid aggressively, suggests that it is entirely reasonable to be having this discussion.

Reasonable? Again, I disagree. The politics alone make this a non-starter. Then you go into the competition from American cities and it becomes even more difficult to find believable. That isn't a slight against Calgary or Calgarians either. It's just reality. And I would say the exact same thing about a number of American cities as well. Its interesting to talk about, but the exercise should be more in understanding the areas where Calgary would have to grow and step up to attract this level of business more so than thinking it is currently possible to compete.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

So it is entirely reasonable to discuss Calgary as a possible destination, because Calgary has two things that make it potentially hungry enough to make an aggressive bid: high current unemployment, and a need to diversify the economy.

Calgary has the youngest and most highly educated populace in Canada. And considering that Canada is better educated than the US in the aggregate, I think it is safe to assume that Calgary would compare favourably to most US cities in that regard as well.

To most of cities of around a million, sure. But the are regions of the U.S. the size of southern Alberta that have a population of 10 or 12 million. In Canada, Southern Ontario has far more technically skilled workers than southern Alberta, in raw numbers.

And pretty much everywhere is desperately trying to diversify their economy these days.

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Also, Calgary is in the unique position that much of its well educated workforce is currently unemployed. Typically, the unemployed ranks are dominated by the unskilled and poorly educated. But Calgary currently has an army of engineers, professionals, and well trained people out of work. I doubt there is another city in NA in a comparable situation.

Amazon doesn't need a lot of unemployed to draw from. They have no trouble at all attracting qualified employees in the ferociously competitive Seattle tech market, jostling elbows with giants like Microsoft and Boeing. Amazon is the kind of company that highly qualified applicants quit their current job to join, even knowing it's unlikely they'll last longer than a year or two.

[bizaro86]

If Alberta is going to do this you need to go big, or why bother. "tossing your hat in the ring" basically is useless, unless you're a politician who wants to say you're making an effort without really trying.

There needs to be a municipal/provincial team that goes all-in, with land, developer quotes, letters from existing big corporations about how cheap and wonderful it is here (Westjet and CP Rail would probably both benefit, and should be willing to sing our praises big time). Plus the province would need to kick in an NDP sized bucket of money.

I'm not big on government kickbacks to private industry, but this would diversify our economy in one fell swoop, and the spinoffs would likely be a real thing simply from the increased international reputation.

In many ways, getting Amazon's HQ2 would probably do more for our international reputation than having the olympics again.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Alberta has had some of the worst employment standards in the country for some time, there are plenty of workers who do not to expect a lot. I'm actually interested to know what you felt put the oil and gas industry culture above others. You listed things like generous vacation and maternity leave. How great was the vacation entitlement and since when were maternity leave rights revoked from all other places of employment? I wonder if people think flex days and an informal environment were worth the price having zero job security.

I used the energy industry because that's where the technically skilled workforce - which is supposed to be Calgary's big asset - would come from.

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

I hear a lot or examples(admittedly only from posters on this site) of workers who are having to do the work of their laid off former coworkers for less money than they were earning before. Seems like we have a lot of go getters and a lot of people who are looking for work. I think you'd be surprised at the number of employers operating in Calgary who have a revolving door when it comes to employees, Amazon would have no issue finding employees in this markets and retention issues would likely be the same as at any other company that operates with their business model in Calgary.

Did you read the NYT article? Even by the ruthlessly Darwinian standards of corporate America, Amazon stands apart in its open contempt for niceties such as family life, employee satisfaction, and labour laws. It's a sweatshop. It's where high achievers go to be humbled and discarded.

Canadian employees, including those who didn't get to enjoy the good times in the oil patch, have it far better than their American counterparts. American companies treat their employees worse than Canadian companies, full stop. I know a lot of people in this city dread the prospect of their company being taken over by an American competitor, or even an American stepping into the role of CEO. And Amazon treats its employees notoriously bad even by American standards.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I used the energy industry because that's where the technically skilled workforce - which is supposed to be Calgary's big asset - would come from.



Did you read the NYT article? Even by the ruthlessly Darwinian standards of corporate America, Amazon stands apart in its open contempt for niceties such as family life, employee satisfaction, and labour laws. It's a sweatshop. It's where high achievers go to be humbled and discarded.

Canadian employees, including those who didn't get to enjoy the good times in the oil patch, have it far better than their American counterparts. American companies treat their employees worse than Canadian companies, full stop. I know a lot of people in this city dread the prospect of their company being taken over by an American competitor, or even an American stepping into the role of CEO. And Amazon treats its employees notoriously bad even by American standards.

What are you basing your claim that American corporations treat their employees worse than Canadian ones? Canadian workers benefit from better labour laws and universal healthcare, but that doesn't mean they are treated any better by their employers, it means their employer doesn't have the option to not provide those things.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

What are you basing your claim that American corporations treat their employees worse than Canadian ones?

Reality.

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Canadian workers benefit from better labour laws and universal healthcare, but that doesn't mean they are treated any better by their employers, it means their employer doesn't have the option to not provide those things.

Ultimately, it's cultural. Canada has more stringent labour laws because Canadians have demonstrated, through legislation and common practice, that we value those minimum standards. Americans do not value them as highly. And Amazon treats its employees far worse that other American tech companies do. There are a lot of highly skilled and ambitious Americans who will forfeit pretty much everything else in their life to work 70 or 80 hours a week for a company they regard as the best in the sector. Also, piles of money. Fewer Canadians are willing to make that extreme trade-off.

[para transit fellow]

i'm just glad that Calgary isn't going after the high tech CGI special effects industry.

I recently heard a podcast/documentary about it. learned a couple of things:


- CGI work is cutthroat. one CGI company got an Academy award for it's work-- and declared bankruptcy about the same time.

- CGI special effects outfits are simple contract deals. $25,000 for a simulated bridge explosion, $5,000 for bullets hitting car etc. There is no profit sharing for the CGI FX contributors

- the work flows to a city because the city has made tax advantages that entice CGi firms. When another city creates a better tax advantage, the CGI groups just move away.

We have the office space... but unfortunately ( Fortunately?) we don't have the right type of Computer / tech talent... But we would have to shell out a lot of concessions to attract these companies

Hollywood CGI might not be good for Calgary.

[Northendzone]

So let's say that the city of Calgary makes a play for amazon and part of the deal includes some concession on prproperty taxes - say a rate of 0.5% compared to the regular rate of 4.0% that is being charged to all of the other established companies in calgary.

How do those existing companies then feel? Do they try and push for a similar deal?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Reality.

Should be pretty easy for you to find something to back up your claim if that's the case.

Ultimately, it's cultural. Canada has more stringent labour laws because Canadians have demonstrated, through legislation and common practice, that we value those minimum standards. Americans do not value them as highly.

Canadians value minimum standards above Americans? How do you explain why some American jurisdictions have better laws and standards than we do in Alberta?

And Amazon treats its employees far worse that other American tech companies do. There are a lot of highly skilled and ambitious Americans who will forfeit pretty much everything else in their life to work 70 or 80 hours a week for a company they regard as the best in the sector. Also, piles of money. Fewer Canadians are willing to make that extreme trade-off.

How is this any different than our O&G industry? People working their 2 week 12 hour/day stretches in Fort Mac while living in camps would be considered to be extreme by many people. I think you may be letting your patriotism distort the facts a little bit.

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by para transit fellow

i'm just glad that Calgary isn't going after the high tech CGI special effects industry.

I recently heard a podcast/documentary about it. learned a couple of things:


- CGI work is cutthroat. one CGI company got an Academy award for it's work-- and declared bankruptcy about the same time.

- CGI special effects outfits are simple contract deals. $25,000 for a simulated bridge explosion, $5,000 for bullets hitting car etc. There is no profit sharing for the CGI FX contributors

- the work flows to a city because the city has made tax advantages that entice CGi firms. When another city creates a better tax advantage, the CGI groups just move away.

We have the office space... but unfortunately ( Fortunately?) we don't have the right type of Computer / tech talent... But we would have to shell out a lot of concessions to attract these companies

Hollywood CGI might not be good for Calgary.

Planet money? Lol

[para transit fellow]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Should be pretty easy for you to find something to back up your claim if that's the case.


Canadians value minimum standards above Americans? How do you explain why some American jurisdictions have better laws and standards than we do in Alberta?


How is this any different than our O&G industry? People working their 2 week 12 hour/day stretches in Fort Mac while living in camps would be considered to be extreme by many people. I think you may be letting your patriotism distort the facts a little bit.

people working the camps did so because of the incentive bucks. We already hear of folks reluctant to go back to camps because the wages have dropped. Thus they don't fell it is worth their effort to do the camp thing. are you are using an old paradigm to explain current reality?

the ex oil patchers who are desperate enough to apply for a job at my outfit are still having trouble understanding a) there is no raise forthcoming because you have been here three months and your previous patch jobs gave raises when you asked for one ( true dialogue-- I wish I was imagining this). one guy whinges about insufficient hours but is not willing to start an hour earlier or work an hour later.

to explain my confusion: we hired him for a part-time gig between 6 am an 5:30 pm.. and he doesn't want work the early hours nor the late hours

From the local job placement nonprofit org, we still hearing about former $100 k people declining job offers because of insufficient wages... Folks claim they will do anything... but there is still a group that is convinced the good old days will return


Amercian tech corps will take these soft oil patch office workers and spank their ass if something like amazon sets up in Calgary.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by para transit fellow

people working the camps did so because of the incentive bucks. We already hear of folks reluctant to go back to camps because the wages have dropped. Thus they don't fell it is worth their effort to do the camp thing. are you are using an old paradigm to explain current reality?

the ex oil patchers who are desperate enough to apply for a job at my outfit are still having trouble understanding a) there is no raise forthcoming because you have been here three months and your previous patch jobs gave raises when you asked for one ( true dialogue-- I wish I was imagining this). one guy whinges about insufficient hours but is not willing to start an hour earlier or work an hour later.

to explain my confusion: we hired him for a part-time gig between 6 am an 5:30 pm.. and he doesn't want work the early hours nor the late hours

From the local job placement nonprofit org, we still hearing about former $100 k people declining job offers because of insufficient wages... Folks claim they will do anything... but there is still a group that is convinced the good old days will return


Amercian tech corps will take these soft oil patch office workers and spank their ass if something like amazon sets up in Calgary.

Cliff had mentioned people's motives for working demanding jobs, one factor he mentioned was money. That's why I made the comparison to camp workers up north. Obviously taking that incentive away will deter people from working those jobs. I just think it's a little over the top to suggest they(Amazon) wouldn't be a good fit here because they don't treat their employees well. We live in a province where workers have endured notoriously poor rights and protections for decades, many companies have thrived here by treating their workers like garbage, it's not exactly a radical new concept.

[Wormius]

It should be noted that there probably won't be a lot of fit between Amazon workers and former oil patch workers. There might be some people with transferable skills, but even within the engineering community there is going to be a very specific skill set that laid off engineers are not going to be able to fill, unless their previous roles were very software or high tech centric. The people who are being said are too accustomed to the salaries and perks of the good old days during the boom probably aren't going to be qualified for these jobs anyway.