Amazon should be considered a “joint employer” of some of its contracted delivery drivers, according to a determination by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
The ruling was announced on Wednesday by the NLRB’s regional director. It relates to drivers at an Amazon warehouse in Atlanta, known as DAT6, who are employed by MJB Logistics, a third-party contractor.
The decision follows two unfair labor practice charges filed in January concerning Amazon’s treatment of contracted drivers.
The NLRB found Amazon had significant control over the drivers’ working conditions, despite being employed by MJB Logistics. This decision could pave the way for Amazon to be compelled to negotiate with employees who are seeking to unionize.
Amazon has long hired third-party delivery companies to handle the logistics of its vast delivery network and has resisted being designated as a joint employer.
However, lawmakers and labor groups, including the Teamsters union, argue that Amazon’s direct influence over drivers’ uniforms, vehicles, schedules, and performance expectations makes the company a joint employer.
Implications for Unionization Efforts
The NLRB’s determination comes as the Teamsters union has been ramping up efforts to organize Amazon’s delivery and warehouse workers.
The Teamsters launched a division in 2021 dedicated to organizing Amazon employees and have led several strikes at the company’s delivery facilities.
In April 2023, a group of drivers working for Battle Tested Strategies claimed Amazon canceled their contract after they voted to unionize with the Teamsters, a claim Amazon denies. Last month, the NLRB made a similar ruling, finding that Amazon was a joint employer of drivers contracted through a third-party vendor at a facility in Palmdale, California.
Need Career Advice? Get employment skills advice at all levels of your career
Unfair Labor Practices and Legal Actions
The NLRB’s determination in Atlanta also found merit to accusations the company had threatened drivers with closing their site if they unionized, made coercive statements, and created the impression of surveillance at the facility.
These charges, if proved, could strengthen labor groups’ claims Amazon has used illegal tactics to dissuade workers from organizing.
While the NLRB’s regional determination is not a final ruling, it represents the first step in the litigation process. Should the parties involved not settle, the case will proceed to a hearing with an NLRB judge.
The judge’s decision can be appealed to the full NLRB board and then further appealed in federal court if necessary.
What’s Next for Amazon
The ruling puts further pressure on Amazon as it navigates increasing labor tensions across its operations.
Should the company be legally recognized as a joint employer of its contracted drivers, the company could be required to enter into negotiations with unionized workers, a significant shift in how it manages labor relations within its extensive delivery network.
Amazon declined to comment on the ruling.
