Prosecutors at a federal labor agency have determined that Amazon is a joint employer of subcontracted drivers who delivered packages for the company in California, pushing back on claims from the online retailer that they are not its employees.
The decision, made by a regional director for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Los Angeles, came after the agency investigated unfair labor-practice charges filed against the company by the Teamsters union.
The prominent labor group represents UPS drivers and has been seeking to unionize Amazon drivers. However, it has encountered challenges, most notably because the company doesn’t directly employ drivers but relies on thousands of third-party businesses that deliver millions of customer packages every day.
Currently, over 275,000 drivers are employed with these businesses, which are called Delivery Service Partners, or DSPs.
The Teamsters and other labor advocates have long said Amazon exercises great control over the drivers—including by determining their routes, setting delivery targets, and monitoring their performances—and should be classified as a joint employer.
Last year, the Teamsters said they unionized dozens of drivers who work for one DSP in Palmdale, California, called Battle Tested Strategies. The labor group filed several unfair labor-practice charges against Amazon after the company refused to negotiate a union contract with them.
On Thursday, NLRB spokesperson Kayla Blado said agency prosecutors made “merit determinations” on three of those charges, one being that Amazon and Battle Tested Strategies were joint employers of the drivers who work for the firm.
Prosecutors also determined that Amazon made unlawful threats and failed to provide relevant information to the union. They further found that the two employers “unlawfully failed and refused to bargain with the union over the effects of the decision to terminate” the DSP’s contract last year, Blado said.
However, the prosecutors dismissed other charges against Amazon, she said, including one that alleged that the company’s decision to terminate its contract with the unionized DSP was a retaliatory move.
If a settlement is not reached, the agency can bring a complaint against Amazon, which would be litigated within the NLRB’s administrative law system. Amazon has the option to appeal a judge’s order to the agency’s board and eventually, to a federal court.
“As we have said all along, there is no merit to the Teamsters’ claims,” Amazon spokesperson Eileen Hards said in a statement. “If and when the agency decides it wants to litigate the remaining allegations, we expect they will be dismissed as well.”
Meanwhile, Teamster General President Sean M. O’Brien championed the findings.
“Amazon drivers have taken their future into their own hands and won a monumental determination that makes clear Amazon has a legal obligation to bargain with its drivers over their working conditions,” O’Brien said.
—Haleluya Hadero, Associated Press business writer
Autentifică-te pentru a adăuga comentarii
Alte posturi din acest grup
DoorDash is expanding its portable benefits pilot program to certain gig workers in Georgia starting next year, the food-delivery giant tells Fast Company.
Dashers (which is wha
To get from 0 to 60 in Formula 1 engine design while competing against organizations with much more experience, Red Bull Ford Powertrains will need extra help (and, no, that boost won’t come in th
I am not what you would call a finely tuned athletic machine. I am, if anything, an outdated lawnmower engine held together by duct tape and rust. So when I was offered the opportunity to let AI h
It’s hard to remember now, as you scroll through a thicket of porn bots, anti-trans activists, and AI slop
There’s been plenty of speculation about whether generative AI could replace—or perh
When Meta established its Oversight Board to adjudicate on decisions it made about removing content from its platforms in 2020, the goal was for the select group of individuals from the media, civ
When a devastating wildfire hit California in November 2018, a powerful CEO went on Twitter to ask how his company could help. That
