Amazon says landmark Staten Isle union vote should exist thrown out.
The company listed a series of complaints against an upstart union’due south organizing efforts. Both Amazon and another union noted objections to another vote in Alabama.
Amazon objected on Friday to a landmark union election at its Staten Island fulfillment center, proverb an upstart spousal relationship’s unorthodox tactics there crossed legal lines, co-ordinate to a copy of its filing to the National Labor Relations Board obtained by The New York Times.
The company argued that the result should be thrown out considering the labor lath had conducted the election in a way that favored the union and members of the union had coerced workers into supporting their cause.
In the final tally concluding Friday, workers cast 2,654 votes to be represented by the Amazon Labor Union and 2,131 voted confronting it, giving the union a win by 11 percentage points.
The outcome of another Amazon ballot, at a warehouse in Alabama, is too being challenged by both the company and a spousal relationship seeking to represent workers there, co-ordinate to filings submitted late Thursday. That union argued that the problems “both separately and cumulatively constitute grounds to ready the election aside,” but Amazon stopped curt of calling for the upshot to be tossed. The union trails in the initial tally.
Amazon’s new filing detailed 25 objections to the result on Staten Island. Its argument turned many of the tactics of the Amazon Labor Union — started past a handful of workers at the facility — against information technology.
Amazon argued, in one instance, that when the union offered workers marijuana, it amounted to an “impermissible grant of support” for workers’ votes. The company said the manner spousal relationship supporters had interrupted mandatory anti-union meetings “intentionally created hostile confrontations” that limited Amazon’due south right to communicate with staff.
The company as well said the union had improperly “polled” workers during a key flow before the election when both employers and unions are prohibited from tracking votes.
The Amazon Labor Wedlock responded on Saturday. “We’re disappointed that Amazon is attempting to overturn the democratic phonation of over 2,600 of its own workers,” said Cassio Mendoza, a worker at the Staten Island warehouse who is an organizer with the marriage. “The unabridged world knows that the workers won our election and we wait forward to sitting down with Amazon in May to negotiate a fair contract for the workers at JFK8.”
Amazon also targeted the N.L.R.B., saying the fashion the agency investigated complaints brought by workers and pursued enforcement against Amazon tilted the field in support of the marriage. The agency has said it was performing its duty to enforce labor rights.
Amazon said the agency had erred in the operations for the election, including not having enough staff on mitt to manage voting, which the company said had created long lines and suppressed turnout.
“Based on the bear witness we’ve seen and then far, equally set out in our objections, we believe that the deportment of the N.50.R.B. and the A.50.U. improperly suppressed and influenced the vote, and we think the ballot should be conducted once more so that a off-white and broadly representative vote can be had,” Kelly Nantel, an Amazon spokeswoman, said in a statement.
In some other objection, the visitor said the marriage had failed to file standard financial reports. In an interview with The Times this week, Christian Smalls, president of the union, said information technology had supplied needy workers with greenbacks, both through separate GoFundMe efforts and the union’southward funds.
If a worker needed her bills paid, “we’re paying that bill, we’re sending coin right over no question,” Mr. Smalls said. Legal experts said that some of those transactions — such as extra pay for wedlock organizers out ill with Covid-19 — might exist fine simply that others could cause problems depending on when and how many people received them.
But the N.Fifty.R.B. “rarely” overturns elections on allegations of union misconduct, said John Logan, a professor at San Francisco State University who studies employer campaigns. Amazon volition need to evidence that any objectionable behave could have contradistinct the outcome of the election, he said, and “dissimilar Amazon, the A.L.U. has no coercive ability over employees.”
The labor agency granted Amazon a two-week extension, to Apr 22, to provide boosted evidence supporting the objections.
In Bessemer, Ala., the union trailed slightly in the initial tally of the votes announced on March 31: 993 workers voted against being represented past the Retail, Wholesale and Department Shop Union, and 875 voted in favor. Simply more than 400 ballots accept yet to be counted because they were challenged by either party. Those challenged ballots, enough to potentially affect the outcome, are set to be resolved at a labor board hearing in the coming weeks.
The election this year was a practise-over that the labor board had ordered later siding with the spousal relationship’south claims that Amazon illegally interfered with an election at the facility last twelvemonth.
In its recent filing, the retail workers union enumerated 21 objections, including intimidation, retaliation and unlawful surveillance of workers.
“The company violated the police in the commencement ballot, and did so over again in this re-run election, without any doubtfulness,” Stuart Appelbaum, president of the union, said in a statement.
Amazon detailed eight objections, including several related to misrepresentation or improper behave when the union visited employees at home. 1 objection was against the labor board itself, for deciding to hold the election by post instead of in person, which Amazon said depressed turnout.
“We’ve said from the get-go that we want our employees’ voices to be heard, and we promise the Due north.L.R.B. counts every valid vote,” Ms. Nantel said.