Written by Danielle Wiesner
(Reuters) – Amazon.com has been charged by the U.S. Labor Council for illegally refusing to negotiate with a union representing drivers working for a contractor, the U.S. labor agency announced on Wednesday.
The complaint filed by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) alleges that Amazon (NASDAQ:) is a so-called “joint employer” of drivers working for the contractor, Battle Tested Strategies (BTS), and used a series of illegal tactics to discourage drivers. Union activities at a facility in Palmdale, California.
BTS drivers voted to join the international Brotherhood of Teamsters union last year, becoming the first Amazon delivery contractors to join the union.
The NLRB said in a complaint released Monday that Amazon violated the law by terminating its contract with BTS after the drivers joined the union, without first negotiating with the Teamsters.
The board said in August that it found justification for the union’s claims that Amazon exercises control over BTS drivers and should be considered an employer under federal labor law. The NLRB said at the time that it would file a complaint unless Amazon settled the case.
The board said last month that it planned to issue a second complaint involving a different group of Amazon drivers.
In a statement, Amazon spokeswoman Eileen Hards said the NLRB did not include many of the Teamsters’ allegations in its complaint, showing that the union is “misrepresenting the facts.”
“As we’ve said all along, there is no merit to any of their claims. We look forward to showing that as the legal process continues and we expect the few remaining allegations to be dismissed as well,” Hards said.
Amazon has said in the past that it does not have enough control over drivers’ working conditions to be considered a joint employer.
Teamsters President Sean O’Brien said in a statement that Amazon is trying to reap the benefits of drivers’ work without taking responsibility for their well-being.
“This decision brings us one step closer to Amazon workers getting the wages, working conditions and contracts they deserve,” O’Brien said.
Joint employment has been one of the most controversial employment issues in the United States over the past decade, and the NLRB’s standard for determining when companies qualify as joint employers has changed several times since the Obama administration.
Business groups favor a test that would require direct, immediate control over workers, while unions and Democrats support a standard covering indirect forms of control.
The case is scheduled to be heard by an administrative judge in Los Angeles, and a preliminary hearing is scheduled for next March. The judge’s decision can be reviewed by the five-member NLRB, whose rulings can be appealed to federal court.
The ruling that Amazon is a joint employer under federal labor law could be applied in cases involving other Amazon contractors and forcing the company to bargain with driver unions.
Meanwhile, the board faces allegations from a growing number of companies, including Amazon, that its structure and internal enforcement procedures violate the U.S. Constitution.
Amazon has sued the board seeking to prevent it from deciding whether the company should negotiate with a union representing workers at a New York City warehouse. A federal appeals court on Monday temporarily blocked the NLRB from ruling while it reviews Amazon’s claims.