Amazon has been at the center of a heated debate regarding its treatment of contracted delivery drivers. A regional director for the National Labor Relations Board recently stated that Amazon should be considered a “joint employer” of some of its contracted delivery drivers, specifically those working at an Atlanta warehouse known as DAT6. This pronouncement comes after the NLRB reviewed two unfair labor practice charges filed in January, raising concerns about how Amazon treated these drivers.
While Amazon has historically relied on third-party drivers to handle its deliveries, the NLRB’s regional director found that Amazon was a joint employer of drivers at the Atlanta site who were employed by a contractor named MJB Logistics. This finding contradicts Amazon’s assertion that it should not be classified as a joint employer of its vast network of contracted delivery companies.
The classification of Amazon as a joint employer could have significant implications for the rights of drivers and their ability to unionize. Lawmakers and labor groups, including the Teamsters union, have criticized Amazon’s treatment of drivers, pointing out that they wear Amazon-branded uniforms, drive Amazon-branded vans, and have their schedules and performance expectations dictated by the company.
Over the past year, the Teamsters union has ramped up its efforts to organize Amazon delivery and warehouse workers. The union established an Amazon division in 2021 to support and fund workers in their organizing endeavors. This move was met with resistance from Amazon, as evidenced by allegations that Amazon canceled a contract with drivers from Battle Tested Strategies after they voted to unionize with the Teamsters.
The recent findings by the NLRB regarding Amazon’s treatment of contracted delivery drivers in Atlanta and Palmdale have raised concerns about the company’s practices. The NLRB determined that Amazon made coercive statements, threatened drivers in Atlanta with site closure if they unionized, and gave the impression of surveillance at the facility. These determinations are not final board decisions but are the first step in the agency’s process of litigating unfair labor practice charges.
If the parties involved do not reach a settlement, a hearing will be scheduled with an NLRB judge to further examine the allegations. Following the judge’s decision, either party has the option to appeal to the NLRB board, and the decision can potentially be escalated to federal court. This legal process underscores the contentious nature of the dispute between Amazon and its contracted delivery drivers.
The ongoing controversy surrounding Amazon’s treatment of contracted delivery drivers highlights the complexities of labor relations in the modern gig economy. The classification of Amazon as a joint employer has far-reaching consequences for the rights of drivers and their ability to unionize. As the legal proceedings unfold, it remains to be seen how this dispute will ultimately be resolved and what implications it will have for the broader landscape of labor rights in the digital age.
Leave a Reply