Why Amazon and Starbucks workers are striking now, and what it means for labor under Trump

December 27, 2024 By Levi Sumagaysay and Jeanne Kuang Leave a Comment

Striking Amazon and Starbucks workers are on picket lines instead of delivering last-minute presents or handing customers Christmas-themed drinks, as their unions pressure the companies during the holidays — and before a less union-friendly president is sworn into office. 

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

The workers accuse their employers of refusing to recognize their unions or to bargain in good faith. They have been organizing for more than four years but have yet to land a contract. Some have filed complaints with the National Labor Relations Board, alleging union-busting behavior by the companies, including coercion, threats, discipline and firings. Amazon and Starbucks have also filed complaints against the unions, accusing them of coercion, violence and illegal strikes.

Soon, the board will likely be less sympathetic to unions after the Senate earlier this month failed to extend the term of then-Chairperson Lauren McFerran. The five-member board had three Democratic members including McFerran. President-elect Donald Trump will have the chance to appoint two more Republicans.

“The Trump NLRB the first time around was the most right-wing, anti-labor NLRB in the entire nearly 90-year history of the board,” said William Gould, a former chairperson of the National Labor Relations Board during President Bill Clinton’s administration and a professor emeritus at Stanford University. 

Gould said he doesn’t remember “any board so eager and activist to reverse what had gone on before.” Because of that, he expects that “most of what the Biden board has done will be overturned by the Trump board,” he said. 

Most of what the Biden board has done will be overturned by the Trump board.WILLIAM GOULD, FORMER CHAIRPERSON, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

Karoline Leavitt, a spokesperson for the Trump transition team, did not respond to specific questions about the board. In an email, she instead described the president-elect as a champion of workers, writing, “The working men and women of America have been left behind, which is why President Trump and Republicans saw historic support from working class voters. President Trump will keep his promise to the hardworking men and women of America by bringing jobs back home, restoring American manufacturing, slashing inflation, and cutting taxes.” 

An analysis of Trump’s policies by the nonpartisan Tax Foundation found his proposed tax cuts would disproportionately benefit higher-income taxpayers, while his planned tariffs would fall hardest on the middle and working class. 

Striking Amazon and Starbucks workers are on picket lines instead of delivering last-minute presents or handing customers Christmas-themed drinks, as their unions pressure the companies during the holidays — and before a less union-friendly president is sworn into office. 

The workers accuse their employers of refusing to recognize their unions or to bargain in good faith. They have been organizing for more than four years but have yet to land a contract. Some have filed complaints with the National Labor Relations Board, alleging union-busting behavior by the companies, including coercion, threats, discipline and firings. Amazon and Starbucks have also filed complaints against the unions, accusing them of coercion, violence and illegal strikes.

Soon, the board will likely be less sympathetic to unions after the Senate earlier this month failed to extend the term of then-Chairperson Lauren McFerran. The five-member board had three Democratic members including McFerran. President-elect Donald Trump will have the chance to appoint two more Republicans.

“The Trump NLRB the first time around was the most right-wing, anti-labor NLRB in the entire nearly 90-year history of the board,” said William Gould, a former chairperson of the National Labor Relations Board during President Bill Clinton’s administration and a professor emeritus at Stanford University. 

Gould said he doesn’t remember “any board so eager and activist to reverse what had gone on before.” Because of that, he expects that “most of what the Biden board has done will be overturned by the Trump board,” he said. 

Most of what the Biden board has done will be overturned by the Trump board.WILLIAM GOULD, FORMER CHAIRPERSON, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

Karoline Leavitt, a spokesperson for the Trump transition team, did not respond to specific questions about the board. In an email, she instead described the president-elect as a champion of workers, writing, “The working men and women of America have been left behind, which is why President Trump and Republicans saw historic support from working class voters. President Trump will keep his promise to the hardworking men and women of America by bringing jobs back home, restoring American manufacturing, slashing inflation, and cutting taxes.” 

An analysis of Trump’s policies by the nonpartisan Tax Foundation found his proposed tax cuts would disproportionately benefit higher-income taxpayers, while his planned tariffs would fall hardest on the middle and working class. 

Under the Biden administration, the NLRB’s director has taken more aggressive action to enforce laws that require employers to bargain in good faith and prohibit retaliation, and taken a series of legal positions favorable to organizing workers. 

They include what John Logan, professor and chairperson of Labor and Employment Studies at San Francisco State University, said was “the most important action” of the board in the Biden years: a 2023 decision that established a new standard on when employers must bargain with unions without a representation election. If a majority of employees vote to unionize, employers must recognize and bargain with the union, or else seek an election within 14 days. If employers engage in unfair labor practices during the process, the board could order them to bargain with the union.

He expects the board to reverse that ruling under Trump.

Issues at Amazon 

Already, companies have been resisting that decision. 

Amazon workers are striking in part to try to force the company to bargain with some of its subcontracted workers. They cite a Los Angeles regional NLRB director’s August 2024 finding that the e-commerce giant was a “joint employer” of a group of delivery drivers, who work for a nationwide network of contractors the company calls “delivery service partners.” That means the finding holds Amazon legally responsible for the wages, working conditions and treatment of the subcontracted workers. If the determination withstands lengthy legal challenges, that could open the door for the workers to bargain directly with Amazon. 

The regional director’s finding stemmed from a group of Palmdale drivers who worked for the contractor Battle-Tested Strategies and who became the first Amazon delivery drivers in the country to unionize in April 2023. Amazon ended its contract with Battle Tested — retaliation, the  Teamsters claimed, for the union drive. Amazon denied that, saying it cut the contract over “repeated” breaches by the delivery company, and the regional director dismissed the retaliation claim.

But the regulator said both Amazon and Battle Tested failed to negotiate with the drivers’ union on working conditions, including the effects of the contract termination on the drivers’ jobs. In September, the agency filed a complaint before the labor board trying to force Amazon to bargain; the larger company in turn sued the NLRB director and the board in federal court, seeking to halt any order to bargain and arguing the board itself is unconstitutional.

Click here to read the full article in CalMatters

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , , ,

Amazon workers are striking at multiple delivery hubs. Here’s what you should know

December 21, 2024 By Staff Leave a Comment

Amazon workers affiliated with the Teamsters union continued a strike Friday at seven of the company’s delivery hubs just days before Christmas.

The workers, who voted to authorize strikes in recent days, joined picket lines on Thursday after Amazon ignored a Sunday deadline the union had set for contract negotiations. Workers at Starbucks stores are also were going on a five-day strike starting Friday to protest lack of progress in contract negotiations with the coffee company.

Amazon, for its part, said it doesn’t expect the strike at delivery stations to impact holiday shipments.

The e-commerce giant has a couple hundred employees at each delivery station. The Teamsters mainly have focused on organizing delivery drivers, who work for contractors that handle package deliveries for the company. But Amazon has rebuffed demands to come to the negotiating table since it doesn’t consider the drivers to be its employees.

The International Brotherhood of Teamsters also says the union represents some Amazon warehouse workers.

Here’s what else you need to know:

Where are the strikes happening?

The strikes are taking place at three delivery hubs in Southern California, and one each in San Francisco, New York City, Atlanta, Georgia, and Skokie, Illinois, according to the union’s announcement.

The union hasn’t said how many workers are participating in the strike, nor how long it will go on. Vinnie Perrone, the president of a local Teamsters union in metro New York, said Thursday that the walkout would continue “as long as it takes.”

The union, which claims to represent 10,000 Amazon workers at 10 facilities, said workers in more locations were prepared to join the fight.

Employees at a company air hub in California have authorized a strike. So have workers at an Amazon warehouse in New York, which unionized with the nascent Amazon Labor Union in 2022 and has since affiliated with the Teamsters.

The Teamsters says its local unions are also putting up picket lines at other Amazon warehouses.

A company spokesperson said Thursday the strikers were “almost entirely outsiders, not Amazon employees or partners, and the suggestion otherwise is just another lie from the Teamsters.”

Teamsters General President Sean O’Brien was scheduled to rally with striking union members on Friday at one of the facilities in California.

What do the workers want?

The striking workers are fighting for higher wages, better benefits, and safer work conditions.

The Teamsters have tried to get Amazon to come to the negotiating table since last year, when the labor organization first said it had unionized a group of delivery drivers in California who work for a contractor. Amazon — which denies it employs the workers — refused, leading the union to file unfair labor charges against the company at the National Labor Relations Board.

In August, prosecutors at the federal labor agency classified Amazon as a “joint employer” of subcontracted drivers. In September, the company boosted hourly pay for the drivers amid the growing pressure.

Amazon warehouse workers who voted to union in the New York City borough of Staten Island also have tried to get the company to engage in contract negotiations.

The National Labor Relations Board certified the Amazon Labor Union election, but the company objected to the representation vote and refused to bargain. In the process, Amazon also filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the labor board, which it accused of tainting the vote.

Some organizers involved with the unionization effort there have long believed Amazon would not come to the negotiating table unless workers went on strike.

What about holiday deliveries?

Click here to read the full article in AP News

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , , , ,

Amazon Suspends Black Lives Matter From Its Charity Platform

February 18, 2022 By Isabel Vincent 1 Comment

The beleaguered Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation has been kicked off Amazon’s charity platform for its failure to disclose where tens of millions in donations it received nearly two years ago have ended up.

AmazonSmile, which gives a portion of eligible purchases on the online shopping site to charities, said it “had to temporarily suspend” the group today, an Amazon spokesperson told The Post.

“States have rules for nonprofits, and organizations participating in AmazonSmile need to meet those rules,” the spokesperson said. “Unfortunately this organization fell out of compliance with the rules in several states, so we’ve had to temporarily suspend them from the program until they come into compliance.”

Amazon plans to hold any funds that have accumulated for BLMGNF “until they’re back in compliance,” the spokesperson said. AmazonSmile has raised more than $300 million for charities, according to its website.

In Oct. 2020, BLMGNF took in more than $65 million in donations from Thousand Currents, a charity that manages assets of grassroots non-profits, according to documents filed with the California Attorney General.

But the group has so far failed to disclose what it did with the cash. As a result, several states have revoked its ability to collect donations. In California, where the group is based, the state’s Department of Justice warned BLMGNF’s leaders earlier this month that they would be “personally liable” for any delinquency fees and fines.

Click here to read the full article at the NYPOST

Filed Under: Trending News Tagged With: , ,

California’s Work Rules Sabotage the Gig Economy

January 1, 2019 By Steven Greenhut 2 Comments

Th Uber Technologies Inc. car service application (app) is demonstrated for a photograph on an Apple Inc. iPhone in New York, U.S., on Wednesday, Aug. 6, 2014. For San Francisco-based Uber Technologies Inc. which recently raised $1.2 billion of investors' financing at $17 billion valuation, New York is its biggest by revenue among the 150 cities in which it operates across 42 countries. The Hamptons are a pop-up market for high-end season weekends where the average trip is three time that of an average trip in New York City. Photographer: Victor J. Blue/Bloomberg via Getty Images

An anti-technology movement from early 19th century Britain has long been part of our lexicon. Luddites were knitters who destroyed textile machines to protect their jobs. Today the term applies to anyone who fights a crusade against the modern economy.

Original Luddites weren’t against technology per se, Smithsonian magazine explained, but only attacked manufacturers “who used machines in what they called ‘a fraudulent and deceitful manner’ to get around standard labor practices.”

California’s modern-day Luddites don’t commit acts of violence against Google, Uber, Amazon and other firms that have shaken up the existing economic order. No one is toasting cellphones in bonfires or sabotaging Federal Express delivery vans, but these New Luddites have used the courts and the legislative process to throw that figurative wrench in the machine. Indeed, the biggest redoubt of Luddite-ism appears to be the California Supreme Court, which in April issued a ruling that has threatened to grind California’s high-tech economy to a halt.

In Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, the court didn’t directly target these new technologies or business models, but clamped down on the way companies use independent contractors rather than full-time employees as a means to stay flexible and competitive in the marketplace. As Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye wrote in the unanimous ruling, “When a worker has not independently decided to engage in an independently established business but instead is simply designated an independent contractor…there is a substantial risk that the hiring business is attempting to evade the demands of an applicable wage order through misclassification.”

The case centered around a package-delivery firm, Dynamex Operations West, which turned its full-time staff into contractors. Obviously, when companies use contractors they need not pay them benefits and are not subject to hourly work rules, wage requirements and the host of labor regulations the state applies to permanent workers. The court tossed out the old, flexible way of determining whether a worker is a contractor or employee and imposed a strict new “ABC Test” for deciding such matters.

Under the new standard, California firms that want to classify their workers as contractors must meet all of these terms: The worker is outside the control of the employer for the work performed; the worker performs work that is outside the company’s normal scope, such as a freelancer who does public relations for a tech firm; and the worker is engaged in an independent business enterprise, perhaps having his or her own LLC. One need not be a labor-law expert to realize how this threatens many burgeoning new business models including Transportation Network Companies such as Uber to old-line industries such as Realtors and hairdressers.

Growing economies are dynamic. There’s no way to lock anyone’s job into place (outside of government work). One of California’s long-standing problems—a key reason for its sky-high poverty rates—is that its labor regulations read like something from the Industrial Revolution. The state imposes burdensome regulations regarding everything from work breaks to overtime. That might be fine on the factory floor, but the rules stifle innovation—and make it far tougher for companies to survive. These union-backed rules also raise the bar so high that many startups can’t get off the ground, which deprives consumers and workers of exciting new opportunities.

The obvious work around has been to use contractors. It’s not just a boon for businesses. Most of the nearly 2 million Californians who are independent contractors prefer to make their own schedules rather than show up 9-5 at the office. Ask your Uber driver, Realtor or barber. The Department of Labor found that 79 percent of contractors prefer these working arrangements with fewer than 9 percent preferring traditional employment.

If companies are forced to hire all their workers on a full-time basis, that might raise some people’s incomes, but it would also raise the cost per worker by a third and could lead to fewer jobs. There’s a market-based way to deal with problems raised by the court. For instance, the state could pass tax and regulatory reforms that make it more cost-competitive for individuals to purchase the kind of healthcare benefits offered to full-time employees. The state could create a “third way”—another worker status that lies between “full-time worker” and “contractor.”

The state’s business community has called on the Legislature and governor to address the problems created by the state high court. Gov. Jerry Brown punted. Incoming Gov. Gavin Newsom has deep ties to the tech community, but one of his top aides is from the California Labor Federation. Unions already are backing a bill to codify Dynamex. This is shaping up as one of the biggest battles in the new session. Will the California government let its ballyhooed New Economy thrive, or will it embrace an approach that was last relevant in the 1800s?

Steven Greenhut is Western region director for the R Street Institute. He was an Orange County Register editorial writer from 1998-2009. Write to him at sgreenhut@rstreet.org.

This column was first published in the Orange County Register.

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , , ,

Report: Silicon Valley Giants Enjoy Billions in Government Subsidies

July 5, 2018 By Chriss W. Street 2 Comments

Silicon ValleyThe latest Subsidy Tracker reveals that some of the most prominent Silicon Valley tech corporations enjoy billions in government subsidies.

“Good Jobs First” is a not-for-profit organization that reviews state and municipal financial reports to track the size and justifications given by government entities to issue corporate tax abatements and direct subsidies that since 2015 have been required accounting disclosures under GASB Statement No. 77.

Most Americans are supportive of government providing defense, public safety, roads, schools, and public health. But the “Subsidy Tracker 2” reveals that governments are issuing record amounts of subsidies to the richest and powerful tech companies, many headquartered in Silicon Valley.

Supposedly entrepreneurial Silicon Valley has been America’s biggest winner in the corporate welfare game. Tesla has been by far the United States’ leader by collecting $2.4 billion in direct subsidies and over $1 billion in tax abatements since 2007. In addition, its SolarCity subsidiary picked up $1 billion in grants and tax abatements from the State of New York and another $497.5 million in U.S. Treasury Department cash grants.

Other Silicon Valley tech taxpayers miners include Google, the second-most valuable company in the galaxy with a market capitalization of $770 billion. It has enjoyed government largess of $766 million since 2000. Apple, the most valuable company in the universe with a market capitalization of $904 billion, banked $693 million in government handouts since 2011. And Facebook, the fifth most valuable company on the planet with a market capitalization of $558 billion, pocketed $549 million, according to the San Jose Mercury News.

But Silicon Valley is about to be displaced as America’s biggest corporate welfare hub by Seattle-based Amazon. According to the Subsidy Tracker, Amazon built its distribution and data centers network with up to $613 million in government grants and tax holidays.

Amazon is now holding the equivalent of a municipal subsidy auction for the right to host its $5 billion second North American corporate headquarters, HQ2.

In a bidding process that generated hundreds of proposals, Amazon named 20 municipal finalists in January. The subsidy packages for the nine locations that made public bids include 1) Raleigh, North Carolina with $50 million; 2) Denver, Colorado with $100 million; 3) Los Angeles, California with between $300 million to $1 billion; 4) Atlanta, Georgia with $1 billion; 5) Chicago, Illinois with at least $1.7 billion; 6) Philadelphia, Pennsylvania with between $2 billion to $3 billion; 7) Columbus, Ohio with $2.3 billion; 8) Newark, New Jersey with $7 billion; and Montgomery County, Maryland with $8.5 billion in tax abatements and infrastructure incentives.

Mercatus Center at George Mason University warns that elected officials, even with the best of intentions, “do not possess the proper incentives to manage taxpayers’ money prudently” when it comes to passing out corporate taxpayer subsidies.

When private investors act in markets they experience price signals, but government decision makers have no way to account for the value or costs of their decisions. When private investors fail they lose money, but it is taxpayers that lose when government fails.

This article was originally published by Breitbart.com/California

Filed Under: Top Stories Tagged With: , , , , ,