The article is written with the intent to make amazon look bad (not that amazon doesn't do this on its own - look at the recent articles about EEs needing to pee in bottles). The article claims 450 workers gathered outside of the awards ceremony then goes on to say it employees 16000 people - meaning less than 3% of workers showed up to protest. I have seen this kind of action at local businesses before where some 4 or 5 union employees show up with big signs when the employer won't play ball. Its a shady tactic. It doesn't really explain what conditions are like from a balanced perspective.

The author is stacking the deck against Bezos repeatedly in this article. It may be true that Amazon has poor working conditions, but it's up to the author to provide evidence of those claims if she's going to quote the criticisms of disgruntled employees throughout the piece. Author Jill Petzinger decided not to provide a single counter-argument even though Bezos and Amazon have responded to such criticisms publicly. Show us the facts on both sides and let us decide for ourselves who the bad actors are.

Article describes the protest that took place and links to Verdi union post. Article describes how European union movement is not going to allow Bezos to abuse workers as he does in the U.S. Article is inspiring for those who support workers organizing. If your looking for balance, watch tv.