Amazon is ‘joint employer’ of some delivery drivers, NLRB says – MASHAHER

Amazon should be considered a “joint employer” of some of its contracted delivery drivers, a regional director for the National Labor Relations Board said Wednesday.

The NLRB was reviewing two unfair labor practice charges filed in January, concerning Amazon’s treatment of some drivers at an Atlanta warehouse, known as DAT6. While Amazon has long hired third-party drivers to handle its swelling number of deliveries, the NLRB’s regional director found that Amazon jointly employed drivers at the site who worked for a contractor called MJB Logistics.

Amazon has fought to avoid being designated as a joint employer of its sprawling network of contracted delivery companies. Lawmakers and labor groups, including the Teamsters union, have disputed the company’s characterization, saying drivers wear Amazon-branded uniforms, drive Amazon-branded vans and have their schedules and performance expectations set by the company.

The NLRB’s determination could compel Amazon to bargain with employees seeking to unionize. The announcement comes after an NLRB official made a similar ruling last month, finding that Amazon is a joint employer of some subcontracted drivers at its facility in Palmdale, California.

Over the past year, the Teamsters has stepped up its efforts to organize Amazon delivery and warehouse workers. The union launched an Amazon division in 2021 to support and fund workers at the company in their organizing efforts. Since then, it’s led a number of strikes at Amazon delivery facilities, while a labor group at an Amazon warehouse on New York’s Staten Island opted to affiliate with the Teamsters in June.

In April 2023, drivers who worked for Battle Tested Strategies said their contract was canceled by Amazon after they voted to unionize with the Teamsters. Amazon denied the claim, saying it ended the contract prior to the union push.

In its determination Wednesday, the NLRB also found merit to charges that Amazon threatened drivers in Atlanta with closing their site if they unionized, illegally made coercive statements and gave the impression of surveillance at the facility.

The NLRB’s determinations in Atlanta and Palmdale aren’t board decisions, Kayla Blado, a spokesperson for the group, said in an email. Rather, they’re the first step in the agency’s general counsel litigating the allegations laid out in an unfair labor practice charge. If the parties don’t settle, a hearing will be scheduled with an NLRB judge. Either party can appeal that judge’s decision to the NLRB board, and it can be further appealed in federal court.

Amazon declined to comment.

WATCH: Amazon’s first U.S. union faces an uphill battle after historic win