Amazon’s impact on Seattle is a hot topic these days, in the news and on the street. It’s not hard to see why. Amazon isn’t merely a symbol of our city’s rapid growth, it’s the single largest engine driving that growth. Amazon now has well over 20,000 employees in the Seattle area, and that number could easily triple over the next few years.
July was a big month for Amazon. When the company posted an unexpected profit, Amazon stocks soared giving the retailer a larger market capitalization than Walmart. Not that they struggle to make money, mind you, but Amazon usually plows that money back into breakneck expansion.
Not only did CEO Jeff Bezos seize the crown of the Commerce King, he suddenly became the world’s fifth-richest person. If that wasn’t enough, Amazon celebrated its 20th birthday with a multiday gala at CenturyLink Field, complete with fireworks and a Macklemore concert for employees and their families.
In a city where income inequality, rising rents and homelessness are the burning issues of the day, it’s not surprising that not everyone is lining up to offer Amazon our hearty congratulations.
Grievances against Amazon are legion. Let’s listen to the chorus: Amazon’s growth is driving up rents and exacerbating Seattle’s traffic woes; the company’s contributions to affordable housing and public transit are negligible; “brogrammers” are gentrifying and ruining the historic character of neighborhoods such as Capitol Hill; Amazon lags behind other big corporations in philanthropy; its hiring practices fail to foster workplace diversity; a toxic corporate culture causes high turnover; conditions in Amazon’s Fulfillment Centers (a.k.a. warehouses) are grueling; and to top it all off, it has subcontracts with irresponsible outfits like Security Industry Specialists (sis), which settled allegations by the Seattle Office of Civil Rights that it violated our paid sick leave law.
Even Seattle city councilmembers are getting in on the action: Last year, all nine councilmembers called on Amazon to address allegations of illegal retaliation against security officers working together to form a union. This year, Councilmembers Jean Godden, Nick Licata, Mike O’Brien, Kshama Sawant and Bruce Harrell have repeated the call for Amazon to use a responsible contractor.
So far Amazon has been able to swat its critics away like flies. And it has its boosters, too, who will point to the positive impacts of growth (“Would you rather South Lake Union return to the way it was before?”). But whether or not Amazon deserves the tirade of abuse, it should start listening.
The way I read the political mood in this city, people are fed up, and those tensions are only going to increase as Amazon’s presence expands.
What could Amazon do, if it had a mind to? To name just a few possibilities: It could drop sis; contribute meaningfully to building affordable housing; fund some Metro service and, as the Transit Riders Union has proposed, cover the cost of the new orca Lift program. Such corporate neighborliness is not unprecedented: In San Francisco, Google is picking up the tab for free bus passes for low- and moderate-income youth, seniors and people with disabilities.
Will Amazon start doing its part to make sure Seattle is truly a city for everyone? That remains to be seen.