Cornell Chronicle

Groshen says:

“Amazon’s decision might matter because it expands on state initiatives to increase minimum wage in the face of a strong labor market, rising inequality and the declining real federal minimum wage. If many other large national companies do this, it could provide an effective substitute for federal action — or spur national action.

“Very strong company profits show that there is plenty of room for wages to rise without endangering survival for many companies. In the last decade, large firms have mostly stopped paying higher wages to low-skill workers — while still paying high wages for high-skill workers. Amazon’s move may show that companies are rethinking this relatively recent development.

“Amazon’s policy change loses significance if it contracts out more work to low wage employers or independent contractors. What policy does Amazon have for the pay and benefits of contractors? Will the company require this wage minimum for those workers, too?

“Additional questions remain: How many workers are affected and by how much? If the number of workers is small or wages being taken back in lower benefits, Amazon’s decision is no big deal. Is there a commitment to adjust the minimum wage with inflation going forward? If not, this may not help for long.”

McMichael says:

“If this passes in the UN General Assembly, which is likely, it will check intensification of agro-exporting at the expense of local farming systems, and will be a rare instance where the voices of the rights holders should count in the making of international law.

“This declaration would extend rights to food sovereignty claims, including the right to land. In the big picture, this has knock-on effects for preserving and promoting food security, since small-scale farming systems produce more than 50 percent of the world’s food and can be highly efficient per unit of land due to the use of family labor and biodiversification.

“Though technically non-binding, many countries have provisions that ratify international declarations into national law, and this declaration can be used as a powerful advocacy tool. It is timely, given the recent intensification of (sometimes violent) land acquisition across the world and a context where the UN is less resourced due to funding cuts to the Human Rights Council.”