business news in context, analysis with attitude

Fox News reports that "a group of pro-abortion Amazon employees filed a public letter to the company Tuesday in which they demanded the online retailer cease any and all business in pro-life states.

The letter said, in part:

"We, the undersigned, come to you today to request immediate and decisive action against the threat to our basic human rights with the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

"As part of Amazon's wide-reaching efforts toward a more inclusive and diverse workforce, we believe that Amazon cannot let this recent decision go unanswered. We ask Amazon, the world's best employer, to actively defend against this assault on our liberty."

The call comes in the wake of the Supreme Court decision last week overturning Roe v. Wade, ending the federal constitutional right to an abortion.

According to Fox News, "The employees requested a series of additional accommodations and actions for Amazon to put into practice, many for the emotional benefit and mental health of company staff.

"These propositions included allowing employees 'space and time to grieve' the Supreme Court decision; Amazon-sponsored protests of the decision; donations to bail funds and abortion access providers; expanded remote work for employees seeking an abortion; an audit of all Amazon political donations; and a 'company-wide policy change going forward to ensure Amazon does not aid or abet anti-abortion causes, ideologies, groups or public figures, including via donation, product sale, public statement, or otherwise'."

KC's View:

Let's be clear - asking Amazon to not do business of any kind in anti-choice states is absurd.  It just isn't going to happen, and the employees demonstrate their naïveté by even asking for such a thing.

There's no question that the SCOTUS decision has created a tectonic shift in the American political and cultural scene that will be playing out for years.  While there will be companies doing business in both pro-choice and anti-choice states that will make allowances for employees in the latter who want and need to travel to the former for reproductive medical care, not every company will do so - and to ask companies to do things such as sponsor protests is beyond what is reasonable.

One other thing.  Over the past few days, I've covered the overturning of Roe v. Wade from a business perspective, because I think it is a legitimate business story with implications for a lot of companies.  I've gotten a number of emails on the subject that want to engage in a political debate on the subject, including a few that referenced pro-choice people as being in thrall to Satan.  (I am not exaggerating.). I'm not posting those emails, nor am I willing to engage in this debate on MNB … it is a rabbit hole that I'm not going down, because there will be no return.  This is not the place, and so I'm going to do my level best to keep the conversation business-oriented.

By the way, a couple of people have written to me suggesting that if businesses are going to provide money to employees in anti-choice states to travel to pro-choice states to get medical care, they should also provide money to pregnant employees who carry their babies to term.  In fact, I would point out, they do - health care coverage includes pregnancy and maternity care, and usually includes maternity (though not always paternity) leave.  And, if an employee needed a medical procedure and had to travel to get it, insurance almost certainly would cover that, too.