The National Labor Relations Board ruled that Amazon.com Services LLC violated federal labor law by denying employees’ Weingarten rights, suspending a union vice president for a prolonged period, making unilateral changes to working conditions, and failing to furnish information requested by the Amazon Labor Union (ALU).
The case involved Amazon’s JFK8 fulfillment center in Staten Island, New York, where the ALU won a representation election in late March 2022. The Board rejected Amazon’s objections to the election and denied review of the union’s certification in August 2024.
Weingarten violations
The Board found that Amazon violated Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act by denying employees’ Weingarten rights – which entitle represented employees to have union representation present during investigatory meetings that could lead to discipline.
In four separate instances, Amazon managers refused employees’ requests for union representation during investigative interviews:
- Union Vice President of Membership C.S. requested to have a “peer or coworker” accompany him during an investigative interview in October 2022. An HR representative denied this request and proceeded with questioning about a work stoppage following a fire.
- D.P., the Union’s vice president of organizing, explicitly requested his “Weingarten rights” during a December 2022 investigation. The loss prevention manager responded: “Currently right now, you know, we are not, you know, in a union environment, right, and we want to have a direct conversation with you.”
- D.H. twice requested “union representation and Weingarten rights” during a January 2023 investigation into alleged workplace violence. An HR partner denied these requests.
- Y.N.L. requested her “union rep” during her April 2023 termination meeting for productivity issues. The HR partner responded: “No, as of right now, we don’t have any representation of the union… we’re still going through the appeals process.”
Discriminatory suspension of union vice president
The Board ruled that Amazon violated Section 8(a)(3) and (1) by suspending D.P., the Union’s vice president of organizing, with pay for 10 weeks while investigating his involvement in a December 2022 altercation at a bus stop between the JFK8 and LDJ5 facilities.
Although Amazon regularly completed such investigations within seven days, D.P. remained suspended from December 7, 2022, to February 15, 2023, and ultimately received no discipline. The Board found this extended suspension discriminatorily removed him from the workplace, preventing him from engaging in union activities.
“The evidence indicates that, within a week of the December 5 incident, the Respondent had collected evidence relevant to the investigation,” the decision states. “The record does not indicate that the Respondent collected any additional evidence after the first week.”
Unilateral policy changes
Amazon violated Section 8(a)(5) by implementing significant changes to working conditions without notifying or bargaining with the union.
First, Amazon unilaterally terminated its policy and practice of notifying JFK8 employees when there were positive COVID-19 tests in the facility. The Board rejected Amazon’s argument that the policy was “temporary,” noting that it was only described as such “in the April 30 ‘Manager Update’ issued about 2 years after the Respondent began its policy and practice.”
Second, Amazon implemented an Off-Duty Access Policy on June 30, 2022, that prohibited employees from being “inside the building or in working areas outside the building” during off-duty periods. The Board found this policy significant and substantial because Amazon later issued discipline under it, including a documented coaching and written warning to C.S.
The Board found that Amazon’s Mobile Phone Policy, which prohibited recording investigatory interviews, did not constitute a unilateral change because the General Counsel failed to prove Amazon previously allowed employees to record such meetings.
Failure to provide information
Amazon also violated the Act by failing to respond to the union’s information requests from October 2022 and February 2023. The October 2022 request sought information about emergency evacuation plans and safety measures following a fire at JFK8, while the February 2023 request concerned an employee’s discharge.
Amazon argued it wasn’t obligated to respond because the requests were sent to attorneys at Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP rather than directly to Amazon. The Board rejected this defense, finding the attorneys had apparent authority to act as Amazon’s agents because they had represented Amazon in representation cases involving the union.
Remedies ordered
The Board ordered Amazon to:
- Cease denying employees’ Weingarten rights
- Stop discriminating against employees based on union position, support and activity
- Rescind the unilateral changes by reinstating its policy of notifying employees of positive COVID-19 tests and discontinuing the Off-Duty Access Policy
- Furnish the union with the information it requested
- Post notices about these violations
The Board did not find that Amazon unlawfully suspended and discharged employee P.C., determining that his conduct – pushing a female manager in the neck or face, calling her a derogatory term, and kicking a garbage can in her direction – justified the discipline regardless of his union support.
The ruling also dismissed allegations that Amazon unlawfully eliminated time off for employees awaiting COVID-19 test results, as the evidence showed only a change in which department processed the requests, not the availability of leave.
See the original ruling here: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25932877-administrative-law-judges-decision-amazoncom-service-llc/
