Amazon Must Negotiate With First Warehouse Workers Union, US Labor Board Rules (reuters.com) 81
Amazon "must negotiate with a labor union representing some 5,000 workers at a company warehouse on Staten Island," reports Reuters, citing a ruling Wednesday from America's National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
The union formed in 2022, according to the article, and "has been seeking to negotiate with Amazon over pay, working conditions and other matters." The NLRB said in its ruling that Amazon "has engaged in unfair labor practices" by refusing to bargain with the labor group or to recognize its legitimacy... Amazon said on Thursday it disagreed with the NLRB's ruling. "Representatives of the NLRB improperly influenced this election," the company said in a statement, suggesting it planned to appeal. "We're confident an unbiased court will overturn the original certification, and we look forward to the opportunity for our team to fairly voice their opinions." An appeal would likely preclude Amazon from having to comply with the NLRB's order while it makes its way through the courts...
Related to the Staten Island case, Amazon has argued that the NLRB itself is unconstitutional and sued to block the agency from ruling on it. The matter is still pending.
After forming independently, that union "has since aligned with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters," the article points out. The Teamsters represent 1.3 million American workers, according to a statement they issued this week, which also includes this quote from the president of Amazon Labor Union-e Local 1. "We are making history at Amazon, and we are doing it through undiluted worker power..."
Their statement adds that the ruling "came only one day after the union announced another historic victory that upheld Amazon Teamsters' right to strike."
The union formed in 2022, according to the article, and "has been seeking to negotiate with Amazon over pay, working conditions and other matters." The NLRB said in its ruling that Amazon "has engaged in unfair labor practices" by refusing to bargain with the labor group or to recognize its legitimacy... Amazon said on Thursday it disagreed with the NLRB's ruling. "Representatives of the NLRB improperly influenced this election," the company said in a statement, suggesting it planned to appeal. "We're confident an unbiased court will overturn the original certification, and we look forward to the opportunity for our team to fairly voice their opinions." An appeal would likely preclude Amazon from having to comply with the NLRB's order while it makes its way through the courts...
Related to the Staten Island case, Amazon has argued that the NLRB itself is unconstitutional and sued to block the agency from ruling on it. The matter is still pending.
After forming independently, that union "has since aligned with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters," the article points out. The Teamsters represent 1.3 million American workers, according to a statement they issued this week, which also includes this quote from the president of Amazon Labor Union-e Local 1. "We are making history at Amazon, and we are doing it through undiluted worker power..."
Their statement adds that the ruling "came only one day after the union announced another historic victory that upheld Amazon Teamsters' right to strike."
And in absolutely unrelated news... (Score:2)
...Amazon just announced that 5000 warehouse workers in Staten Island will be offered new roles in a company warehouse in Seattle because their previous warehouse in Staten Island will be completely automated with robots and AI systems. The pilot program in the newly automated Staten Island warehouse requires only a small number of staff to oversee the operations. It will be a model for all future warehouses and distribution centers. If those affected employees choose not to accept the relocation package fr
Re: And in absolutely unrelated news... (Score:1)
I suspect the unionized facility is leased, and this whole adventure could end when the tenant (Amazon) can't negotiate a new lease with the owners (Amazon).
Re: (Score:2)
Not a bad FP branch, and I can add a relevant citation. The book is mostly about abusing people to increase the profits of giant tech companies and Amazon gets plenty of mentions. They tried to focus the book on AI, and that's where most of the examples come from, but it's really a broader thing. If there is interest in more books [On Slashdot? ROFLMAO] I can dig up some others from the last few years. But this one was published last year:
Feeding the Machine by Muldoon, Graham, and Cant.
Ye Gods! (Score:1)
"Amazon "must negotiate with a labor union representing some 5,000 workers at a company warehouse on Staten Island,"
5,000 workers?!
I fully expect negotiations to drag out for years (longer) - Amazon is apparently intending to appeal the previous decision, and even if forced to sit down and negotiate with the workers union, that process will drag on...
I expect this is a war of attrition - Amazon can just maintain status quo and overtime the workforce will turn-over, perhaps to the point that Amazon can get the workers to vote down the union...
Re: (Score:3)
Collective bargaining for wages is a bad thing? Warehouse workers earning more does not make you earn less.
Re: (Score:3)
People are dumb. Really dumb.
Re: Ye Gods! (Score:3)
The minimum wage going up does cause inflation, e.g. in restaurant prices. It made me less likely to get restaurant food.
Nowadays there's been so much inflation that I don't get restaurant food at all.
Re: (Score:2)
The minimum wage going up does cause inflation, e.g. in restaurant prices. It made me less likely to get restaurant food.
Nowadays there's been so much inflation that I don't get restaurant food at all.
Not raising the minimum wage hasn't stopped inflation either, and also makes it more difficult for people to afford said inflation.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's see, how many things wrong with this?
1. Minimum wage for tipped workers is a third of the general minimum wage ($2-something an hour, as opposed to $7.25).
2. I remember when tips were 10%. Now instead of the employer paying
the staff the wage, *you* pay 20% to make it possible for them to
afford a shared apartment in a slum.
Re: (Score:2)
If you make your money by owning rather than by working, that's true. Higher wages reduce business owners' income, at least in the short term. So next time someone has that opinion, find out what they do for a living. They'll probably say they "run" something.
Earn less? (Score:2)
Collective bargaining for wages is probably good for the collective bargainers as they will make higher wages. But probably not great for the company as they will have higher costs, and not great for those buying the companies products because those higher costs will be passed on to the customers in higher prices.
While the numbers on kenh's paycheck may not change, his normal Amazon purchases will most likely increase in price if Amazon's costs increase. In affect he is then earning less as the value of his
Re: (Score:2)
and not great for those buying the companies products because those higher costs will be passed on to the customers in higher prices.
Only true for goods and services where there is perfectly inelastic demand, which kind of doesn't exist. Even demand for fuel is somewhat elastic. Health care has about the least elastic demand. Junk from Amazon has highly elastic demand.
But maybe Bezos and the other execs will take a pay cut to come up with more money for the warehouse workers and prices will not increase.
This would certainly happen to a large degree, otherwise Amazon could price themselves out of competitiveness fairly easily.
Re: (Score:2)
This is bullshit. The big companies' C-suite, and the big investors, make huge incomes. Employees - esp. at the bottom, make crap. Maybe the CEO salary shouldn't be $25M/yrea?
Re: (Score:2)
Collective bargaining for workers is certainly a good thing, for workers at least. Using the government to force employers to the table is a bad thing.
If everyone who wants to be a warehouse worker joins the union, then Amazon and everyone else who runs a warehouse will have to go to the union to find workers. That's how a lot of unions (particularly of skilled labor) work. If, on the other hand, there's literally millions of people willing to work without the union and for some reason Amazon (and apparen
Re: (Score:2)
It is wholly unacceptable to expect a single employee to stand up to a corporate legal team.
Re: (Score:1)
In some states, in some companies, union membership is mandatory. Part of pay goes directly to the union. Of the union's portion, a small part goes to wage negotiation and other valid employee concerns, some goes to union thugs to make trouble, and some goes to payoffs to mostly Democrat politicians.
Legally mandated corruption.
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon (and apparently only amazon)
Well, what did you expect when Amazon became America's warehouse and distributor to the door? If Amazon has a problem with being a large company subject to federal regulations, there's plenty of places around the world that would be happy to have them. As a multinational super conglomerate, they are probably already in those jurisdictions with that lack of worker's rights. As well as other jurisdictions that have even higher standards than America is willing to impose.
Win the battle, lose the war (Score:1)
Just a reminder of what can happen when workers strike...
https://www.labornotes.org/200... [labornotes.org]
Re: (Score:1)
I fully expect Amazon to close this warehouse, maybe it will be contaminated with something radioactive for example, to make things easier and then it will shut down. Personally I root for the anarcho capitalist solution and wish Amazon to win this battle for its private property rights.
Re: Win the battle, lose the war (Score:2)
Anarcho-capitalism isn't really a thing. Or at least, it isn't anarchism. It's essentially end-stage libertarianism. If you want to see what it looks like, Somalia is currently in such a situation. It ends up being less freedom and more feudalism with petty warlords all fighting for dominance. It's not unlike the Crips, Bloods, the Mafia, etc., just with everything instead of just with illegal vices.
This is all to say that this kind of anarchy would not be pleasant. Only teenagers, idiots, and assholes actu
Re: (Score:1)
As you can imagine I am 100% against communism and any form of socialism. Bezos and everyone else must have property rights not hindered by government, it is his business to run (or his board) and government must not be in position to dictate how any company hires and fires people, who they hire and fire, why, etc.
Re: Win the battle, lose the war (Score:2)
Ok but just don't think you are for capitalism because that doesn't really exist. If capitalism did exist than companies would have to compete with other companies for hiring and unions wouldn't be required.
Re: (Score:2)
When Bezos does not (have the time to) negotiate with each individual a union is a great solution for both sides.
It's got absolutely nothing to do with property rights.
Re: (Score:1)
In actual business practice, employees seldom negotiate their wages. They just take what they get. Those who do negotiate, do so with their boss, their boss's boss, and/or someone in personnel.
Unions are blind to individual merit. Those who want unions are slackers or people who see themselves as helpless victims.
Re: (Score:2)
Geez, are you *stupid*. Maybe you should refuse to call 911 when your house catches fire, and call a company that you pay for to come put it out. And no driving on the roads that MY taxes paid for. And I'm *sure* you just love the annual increases in your medical insurance.
Shall I go on?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just a reminder of what can happen when workers strike...
Sure. Just a reminder, back in the old days, before the NLRB forced owners and unions to negotiate in good faith... Factories and warehouses burned to the ground during labor disputes, people were beaten and killed.
Desperate people do desperate things when they feel they have nothing left to lose.
Re: (Score:2)
And for all of you out there who think that that's exaggerated, take a look at the Ludlow Massacre [wikipedia.org] with its body count of approximately 21, mostly women and children.
Re: (Score:1)
If you want ... (Score:2)
Oh fuck off (Score:2)
They will spend any amount of money to eliminate you from the economy. And we gave them all the money because of sentiments like yours.
I get that you are trolling because it's fun but the thing is they are coming for you and all of us. The sooner you come to terms with that the better.
Assuming you're not ancient Boomer trash. In which case you get to die leavi
Re: (Score:2)
the thing is they are coming for you and all of us.
Let them come. The socialists have been heralding the post scarcity society. The Star Trek economy is approaching and the left is terrified. Seems someone just told them that the hammer and sickle symbolize labor.
Huh? (Score:2)
Your reply intrigues me, but I confess I do not understand it.
Why is the socialist/left terrified that a Star Trek post scarcity society/economy that they pointed to positively is coming?
Re: (Score:2)
Why is the socialist/left terrified
Someone figured out that socialism means you have to work. Even in a Star Trek economy, someone has to wear the red shirt.
Red Shirt Robots (Score:2)
Okay, but just put red shirts on the robots then?
Re: (Score:2)
Note: I think I like where you are coming from, but I need it refined so I can support it; forgive me poking it.
I do not think the leftist really work, Marx and Engels never really did.
Today the proletariat does the work while the leftist get funded by proletariat, the government, or even more ironically by daddy's private company they want to destroy.
Tomorrow the robots will do the work, and the leftist need to use fear today to drive the proletariat to socialize the industries so the leftists can control
Re: (Score:3)
those who spout Marxist nonsense obviously think they are the âoenatural superiors.â
A classless (true communist) society can't scale up beyond Dunbar's Number [wikipedia.org]. They do work for groups like communes and small, isolated villages. Where everyone knows everyone else, what their skills are and who is/isn't getting work done. The latter are usually banished from the community, either returning the miscreant to "outside society" (this presumes the existence of an outside society willing to deal with your screw-ups). Or accepting the fact that the banished will probably be eaten by wild animals.
O
Re: Huh? (Score:2)
Only because people have never figured out how to keep greed from rising to the top. Marxism requires totally fair and level headed people who want comfort for all over everything for themselves. Humanity has not evolved to that point yet and I'm sad to say that we are sliding backwards now.
Re: (Score:2)
Only because people have never figured out how to keep greed from rising to the top.
It's doing quite well at the bottom right now.
Marxism requires totally fair and level headed people
Instead of some lazy bums that hang around coffee shops, refusing to work and just sitting around, writing pamphlets. True Marxism would have handed him a broom and dustbin. And told him that this section of sidewalk was his responsibility.
"What do you mean, 'your hour of work is more valuable than that of the next peasant?' Sweep!"
Re: (Score:2)
Every society is going to have lazy people. The level headed people will need to cover for them without having third grade recess tantrums and that's just how it is. But that's what I mean by level headed people.. no fit of jealousy the instant someone else is perceived to have more.
Re: (Score:2)
The level headed people will need to cover for them without having third grade recess tantrums
Socialism [imgflip.com] has an answer for that. We should switch now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
"totally fair and level headed people". This is the "benevolent dictator" fallacy that is thousands of years old.
In the unlikely event that a person can be found that initially qualifies, it won't last. As Lord Acton observed, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
Re: (Score:2)
Inevitable? Accusations are Confessions. (Score:2)
If the AI and robots are inevitable, it seems as the grandfather post asserts raising the cost of labor will accelerate their arrival.
Re: (Score:1)
Well we know you are lazy Commie trash
This will accelerate... (Score:3)
...the adoption of robots
No it won't (Score:1)
The Old Kings had a Divine right. The Epstein
Cost is the only factor. (Score:2)
I can understand why they might want to replace MpVpRb as an employee with a robot that does not sleep.
But I am confused on why they do not want MpVpRb as a customer?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So far as fulfillment warehouses go, feasibility is already 100%, that is to say there is no task needed to be performed that can not currently be done by machines.
Again Amazon will replace ALL of their warehouse workers as soon as it is feasible. So far they have only been able to replace some of them.
Re: (Score:2)
...the adoption of robots
Amazon already extensively uses robots in their warehouses (notably for moving pods to/from the picking stations currently staffed by people). Replacing the human pickers with robots is still somewhat of a work in progress (Amazon does have their Blue Jay robot), but that is certainly a goal.
Re: (Score:2)
Amazon will replace workers with robots the second it is feasible. This won't do anything to change that.
just close it. (Score:2)
It will cost less to ship stuff in from elsewhere.
Standard tactic (Score:3)
Not surprising in the least. The NLRB has no current regulations on the books governing how long a new union can be delayed during the initial bargaining process. There's been talk in Washington related to updating NLRB regulations to impose time lines on employers and unions to encourage swift completion of collective bargaining where no contract exists. So far as I know, nothing has changed yet. Amazon is on the forefront of abusing the negotiation process and ignoring all possible ULP complaints.
Re: (Score:2)
So I am pretty naïve perhaps on unions.
But I thought the way it worked is a bunch of workers agree to strike if their demands are not met.
Why did the warehouse workers not just walk out when Amazon refused to negotiate?
What good does ruling Amazon has to negotiate do?
What stops Amazon from sending a negotiator and simply never agreeing on any terms?
I am assuming the labor board cannot mandate Amazon accept terms.
Or maybe this is just the first step toward forcing terms on Amazon?
Re: Standard tactic (Score:2)
In Canada they are legally required to negotiate in good faith. If talks stall then they go to binding arbitration by an appointed neutral third party. When this happens the company usually gets most of what they want anyway though.
Re: Standard tactic (Score:2)
So I am pretty naÃve perhaps on unions.
But I thought the way it worked is a bunch of workers agree to strike if their demands are not met.
There are many possibilities before workers withdraw their labour.
The union should advise their members about what they can aim to achieve and what legal ramifications exist.
They should be easier to deal with compared to 5000 ignorant people, although not as easy as 5000 people who sign any contract without asking questions.
While the employers can pay a retainer to HR experts, 5000 people need to pool their resources to get similar quality of legal advice. This should be the basic understanding, rather than
Re: (Score:2)
Strikes are usually conducted after talks break down. Amazon won't even come to the table. There's also the question of whether or not the Teamsters local can get enough people to strike and other considerations. Strikes don't always work in the union's favor.
Re: (Score:1)
That's done by majority vote. If 49% of the employees want to work, they will often be prohibited either because the business requires most people to be working or the company can't run at all (think steel mill) or they'll be physically threatened.
they can just DSP the warehouse and force the mast (Score:2)
they can just DSP the warehouse and force the master DSP to work with the sub DSP?
Good luck. (Score:2)
One of Amazon's warehouses in the Montreal area (Laval) unionized. Amazon took the nuclear response and closed every warehouse in the entire province, seven in total. All Amazon orders destined for Quebec are now shipped from Ontario.
Re: Good luck. (Score:2)
And Canada is suing Amazon on the workers behalf.
Re: (Score:2)
That ultimately won't matter, because the workers have already been laid off, and the courts can't order Amazon to reverse the decision. The best case scenario is that several years down the road, Amazon will have to make a one-time payout to the workers.
Re: (Score:2)
And next day or another kind of fast delivery is not affected?
Re: (Score:2)
There was an initial large disruption as they dumped a huge number of packages into alternate delivery systems that weren't prepared for the sudden massive increase in load. Within a few weeks, it had settled down, and shipping times had improved enough that same-day and next-day shipping were once again available, albeit with shorter "order by" windows. The quality of the delivery experience has dropped significantly (in terms of failed/late deliveries) due to them relying exclusively on "Intelcom" (a gig
The NLRB has little actual power (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I dunno, maybe they like the job. Or the people they work with (that happened to me). Or, given the actual job numbers, not the lies that this regime puts out, maybe they don't want to try finding another job?
Re: (Score:2)
"Fairly voice their opinions" (Score:2)
"We're confident an unbiased court will overturn the original certification, and we look forward to the opportunity for our team to fairly voice their opinions."
Yes, a fair voicing of "opinions" on labor conditions between one human and one globe-spanning immortal megacorporation. Very fair.
Re: (Score:1)
Cheaper to close the location down (Score:2)