Speaker 1: What Trump delivered for Amazon. The FEDS were pushing a
Speaker 1: landmark case about Amazon's control of its contract drivers. Then
Speaker 1: the president put Amazon's former lawyer in charge. By Josh Idelson,
Speaker 1: read aloud by Mark Leidorf. When government officials shut down
Speaker 1: major roads and highways in southern California during a record
Speaker 1: storm in the winter of twenty twenty three, it seemed
Speaker 1: obvious to Jonathan Irvin that his delivery driver should stay home.
Speaker 1: Irvin was the owner of battle tested Strategies in Palmdale,
Speaker 1: one of thousands of small businesses Amazon dot Com has
Speaker 1: hired over the years to deliver its packages. Palmdale is
Speaker 1: on the north side of Los Angeles County, which was
Speaker 1: experiencing an unusual winter storm. Snow circled the Hollywood Sign.
Speaker 1: The mountains near Palmdale received their first blizzard warning in
Speaker 1: thirty four years, and other parts of the county were
Speaker 1: warned to expect flash floods. Flights to La X were
Speaker 1: briefly grounded, beaches and parks shut down, and Disneyland's Magic
Speaker 1: Happens Show didn't go on. But the decision about whether
Speaker 1: to brave the storm wasn't up to Irvin, he says,
Speaker 1: the manager of Amazon's local warehouse ordered him to send
Speaker 1: his drivers out. I was like, what are you talking about,
Speaker 1: recalls Irvin, a US Air Force veteran who served in
Speaker 1: Operation Iraqi Freedom. The roads are closed. He sent the
Speaker 1: Amazon rep videos he'd shot on his phone that showed
Speaker 1: snowy roads blocked off by orange cones with the flashing
Speaker 1: lights of a police cruiser standing guard. He was like, well,
Speaker 1: we still have to attempt delivery, Irvin says, Central Ops said,
Speaker 1: we must attempt delivery. The manager wouldn't refer Irvin to
Speaker 1: anyone at Central Ops, he says, and when he stressed
Speaker 1: that sending out his drivers would put them in danger,
Speaker 1: the rep kept repeating delivery must be attempted. Irvin, who
Speaker 1: was in the middle of an escalating series of conflicts
Speaker 1: with Amazon, says he felt the company was leaving him
Speaker 1: no choice. If his drivers didn't head out into the storm,
Speaker 1: battle tested strategies contract with Themmazon, its sole customer would
Speaker 1: be at risk. We are still going to send your drivers,
Speaker 1: the manager had told him, according to a lawsuit he
Speaker 1: later filed in California State Court. In the end, he says,
Speaker 1: the team ended up trying to follow the order. A
Speaker 1: couple of months later, Amazon informed him it was canceling
Speaker 1: the contract anyway, and Irvin's business soon went co put.
Speaker 1: They control everything, he says, You're just a cog. In
Speaker 1: response to a detailed inquiry from Bloomberg BusinessWeek, Amazon spokesperson
Speaker 1: Sam Stephenson said in a statement, we closely monitor our
Speaker 1: nationwide operations twenty four to seven to help prevent weather
Speaker 1: related disruptions from impacting our employees, partners, and customers. He
Speaker 1: said the company uses a best in class Amazon developed
Speaker 1: tool to flag expected severe weather events, establishes a clear
Speaker 1: plan for delivery vendors to make adjustments as needed, and
Speaker 1: can communicate directly with drivers to ensure they can seek
Speaker 1: shelter or take breaks depending on conditions. In its statement,
Speaker 1: Amazon also said that people in Irvin's position have full
Speaker 1: control over their operations and that the vast majority of
Speaker 1: them tell us that they love being entrepreneurs who create
Speaker 1: good jobs and have a positive impact in their communities.
Speaker 1: The company said Irvin is an outlier whose contract was
Speaker 1: terminated for repeated safety violations. In his California lawsuit, Irvin
Speaker 1: says Amazon's stated reason for terminating him were unsubstantiated, and
Speaker 1: that the company cut him off in retaliation for being
Speaker 1: a whistleblower. In a filing, the company denied generally and specifically,
Speaker 1: each and every allegation in that suit. Amazon calls businesses
Speaker 1: like irvins its delivery service partners. Over the past decade,
Speaker 1: Amazon has built a network of thousands of DSPs to
Speaker 1: deploy hundreds of thousands of drivers who deliver some twenty
Speaker 1: million packages daily across nineteen countries. This network has played
Speaker 1: a crucial role in cementing the company's dominance in speedy deliveries.
Speaker 1: It's also made Amazon one of the most extreme examples
Speaker 1: of a phenomenon that has swept through through the American
Speaker 1: workforce in recent decades, in which ground level workers core
Speaker 1: to a given brand, from Google coders to McDonald's cashiers
Speaker 1: to Uber drivers are employed on paper by someone else. Increasingly,
Speaker 1: companies get to have their cake while offloading the calories
Speaker 1: and messi crumbs. For Amazon, this who's the Boss arrangement
Speaker 1: offers a liability shield against complaints both involving workers auto
Speaker 1: accidents and brought by them wage theft. It's also made
Speaker 1: it much simpler for the company to avoid negotiating with
Speaker 1: drivers who want to organize, or at least that was
Speaker 1: the case until it parted ways with battle tested strategies.
Speaker 1: In twenty twenty three, while Amazon was winding down its
Speaker 1: business with the company, Irvin's staff signed up to unionize
Speaker 1: with the teamsters, setting off a year's long legal battle
Speaker 1: to prove that Amazon was legally their boss along with
Speaker 1: Irvin what's known as a joint employer, the eventual goal
Speaker 1: becoming Amazon's first US contract drivers to be deemed its
Speaker 1: employees and the nation's first workers to force the company
Speaker 1: to bargain with them collectively. The driver's odds were always long.
Speaker 1: Four years after employees at an Amazon warehouse in New
Speaker 1: York City voted to organize, no negotiations have taken place,
Speaker 1: and Amazon is asking a federal court to override a
Speaker 1: series of rulings requiring the company to come to the table.
Speaker 1: But until this spring, the Palmdale drivers were making landmark progress.
Speaker 1: Even after President Donald Trump was sworn in for a
Speaker 1: second term last year, the US government kept arguing that
Speaker 1: Amazon was the boss of Urvan's workers and that it
Speaker 1: was obligated to negotiate with them. Then in April, the
Speaker 1: government moved to end the case on terms favorable to
Speaker 1: Amazon under orders from Trump's newly appointed General Council of
Speaker 1: the National Labor Relations Board, previously an outside attorney for
Speaker 1: the company. The NLRB declined to comment on the settlement
Speaker 1: whatever happens next. The trial has gone on long enough
Speaker 1: to open an unprecedented window into the extent of Amazon's
Speaker 1: control over its supposed contractors. BusinessWeek used Freedom of Information
Speaker 1: Act requests to obtain thousands of pages of confidential company
Speaker 1: records secured by the US government via the case. They
Speaker 1: lay bare Amazon's intimate and intensive regulation of workers it
Speaker 1: insists aren't its employees, including governing which drivers DSPs can hire,
Speaker 1: when they work, where they drive, what they say, how
Speaker 1: they smell, and much more. Among the new details the
Speaker 1: records reveal are the extent to which Amazon emphasizes that
Speaker 1: drivers are expected to act as ambassadors to its customers,
Speaker 1: the plethora of ways it tracks drivers progress and performance,
Speaker 1: marking in red places where it believes they've lingered too long,
Speaker 1: and showing each DSP owner which of their employees it
Speaker 1: rates the worst. And the scripts and gag rules it
Speaker 1: gives DSPs about talking to drivers, customers, vendors, and the public.
Speaker 1: Their control freaks because it's central to their business model,
Speaker 1: says David Wyle, the US Department of Labour's head of
Speaker 1: Wage and Our Enforcement during the ou Obama administration. If
Speaker 1: you are that deeply involved, congratulations, you have responsibility for
Speaker 1: the employment relationship, or at least that's how it's supposed
Speaker 1: to work under the law, says Wile, who's now a
Speaker 1: professor of social policy and economics at Brandeis University. He
Speaker 1: says he worries that Amazon's apparent victory in the NLRB case,
Speaker 1: in spite of evidence demonstrating that its control over the
Speaker 1: operations of its subcontractors is historically extreme, will open the
Speaker 1: door to other companies micromanaging workers to a similar degree,
Speaker 1: even as they abdicate the responsibilities of an employer. It
Speaker 1: will become more and more of a model to the
Speaker 1: extent that companies like Amazon are allowed to create this illusion,
Speaker 1: Wile says. Amazon says DSP's independence is very much real.
Speaker 1: The DSP program was founded on the fact that small
Speaker 1: business owners know their community's best, the company said in
Speaker 1: its statement. They make decisions about who they hire and
Speaker 1: how they operate their businesses, and our contract standards are
Speaker 1: common across the delivery indo. Amazon also denied wrongdoing in
Speaker 1: the NLRB case. We're glad to put it behind us
Speaker 1: so we can focus on supporting our team, our partners,
Speaker 1: including delivery service partners, and the communities we collectively serve,
Speaker 1: the company said. At trial, an Amazon attorney argued that
Speaker 1: Irvin was behaving like George Costanza, alluding to the Seinfield
Speaker 1: episode in which the character quits his job and then
Speaker 1: tries to go back like it never happened. By the
Speaker 1: time Irvin recognized his driver's union, Amazon argued he knew
Speaker 1: his contract was being terminated early, so the organizing effort
Speaker 1: amounted to a poorly veiled revenge plot, one the company
Speaker 1: says never secured legitimate majority support. Irvin and his former
Speaker 1: drivers say he just let them choose for themselves. In interviews,
Speaker 1: a dozen drivers who've worked for other DSPs in three
Speaker 1: states described them as potemkin businesses that enforce Amazon's extreme rules,
Speaker 1: constant surveillance, and grueling quotas that in some urban areas
Speaker 1: can reach thirty stops an hour. Once, as her DSP
Speaker 1: manager suggested a funnel she could use to pee into
Speaker 1: a bottle in her van, others say their managers told
Speaker 1: them they must precisely follow any route Amazon software lays
Speaker 1: out for them, even if it makes no sense to
Speaker 1: help the algorithm learn. Amazon says that such characterizations are
Speaker 1: false and the views expressed aren't representative of most DSPs
Speaker 1: or their employees, and that drivers don't have to obey
Speaker 1: its suggestions on the order of their deliveries. As with
Speaker 1: other teaching jobs, the pay isn't great. Last year, Amazon
Speaker 1: announced it would contribute an additional one point nine billion
Speaker 1: dollars that it predicted would help DSPs hike driver's average
Speaker 1: pay to nearly twenty three dollars an hour. In contrast,
Speaker 1: hourly pay for full time teamsters drivers at United Parcel
Speaker 1: Service ranges from around twenty three dollars to forty eight dollars.
Speaker 1: While the union fights the NLRB settlement, it has continued
Speaker 1: trying to organize other Amazon drivers. It's also pushing for
Speaker 1: legislation that would upend Amazon's contracting model. In city councils
Speaker 1: such as New York's, workers say the unionization Irvin cleared
Speaker 1: the way for has boosted their efforts, as have the
Speaker 1: disclosures he's helped bring into the public record about Amazon's
Speaker 1: behavior and controls, but the most important factor, many say
Speaker 1: is the treatment they face day to day. Driver Matt
Speaker 1: Multari says Amazon forces him and his colleagues to perform
Speaker 1: with the dexterity of olympians and the stamina of robots.
Speaker 1: Irvin says the rise and fall of his driver's legal
Speaker 1: case proves his point. Amazon is really the one at
Speaker 1: the wheel. In his California lawsuit, he's alleging that Amazon
Speaker 1: controlled him and his business so utterly that even he
Speaker 1: should have been classified as an Amazon employee. Owning a
Speaker 1: DSP wasn't real entrepreneurship. He says, it was like being
Speaker 1: a hapless star trek ensign who got absorbed into the borg.
Speaker 1: You're not a partner, Irvin says. Resistance is futile. Irvin
Speaker 1: had always wanted to be his own boss. As a
Speaker 1: teen in Flint, Michigan, where his grandparents raised him. After
Speaker 1: his mom died, he tried and failed to launch a
Speaker 1: mail order delivery business. In nineteen ninety seven, he joined
Speaker 1: the Air Force straight out of high school. He served
Speaker 1: on active duty for a decade before becoming a reservist
Speaker 1: and taking a job with a military contractor which brought
Speaker 1: him to Kuwait and Iraq. Then in twenty eighteen, Irvin
Speaker 1: saw an ad from Amazon that he says sounded enticing.
Speaker 1: The company was seeking veteran leaders interested in running their
Speaker 1: own business and making as much as three hundred thousand
Speaker 1: dollars a year as a DSP. He says he never
Speaker 1: managed to make that amount. They recruited me to be
Speaker 1: a leader. Irvin says, I was like, Wow, I like Amazon.
Speaker 1: They're pretty tip of the spear, battle tested strategies started
Speaker 1: delivering to customers in October twenty nineteen. Irvin was an
Speaker 1: early star of the DSP program, scoring high ratings, grazing
Speaker 1: promotional materials, and recruiting more would be business owners. In
Speaker 1: twenty twenty, citing Irvin's proven leadership, Amazon asked him to
Speaker 1: transfer his operations from Pasadena to a warehouse it was
Speaker 1: opening in Palmdale, an hour north of la We would
Speaker 1: love to have a strong owner like you help us
Speaker 1: launch DAX eight and be a pioneer in creating a
Speaker 1: customer and driver obsessed culture in our new location, an
Speaker 1: Amazon rep told Irvin in an email viewed by BusinessWeek.
Speaker 1: He agreed to take on the challenge, but Irvin says
Speaker 1: he slowly began to realize the program wasn't what it seemed.
Speaker 1: The more he tried acting like a leader, the more
Speaker 1: his relationship with Amazon soured. When he suggested the company
Speaker 1: adopt the Air Force's standards for protecting troops from excessive heat,
Speaker 1: Amazon ignored him. When he suggested boosting driver's health and
Speaker 1: morale by instituting periodic surprise lower quota days, one of
Speaker 1: the Amazon reps he'd been working with rejected the idea
Speaker 1: out of hand. They always hide behind this huge cloud
Speaker 1: of bureaucracy, he says. They would say there's nothing we
Speaker 1: can do. In November twenty twenty one, Irvin, who's black,
Speaker 1: filed an internal complaint alleging racial bye b by an
Speaker 1: Amazon manager who he says refused to communicate directly with
Speaker 1: him and had falsely accused him of being aggressive. According
Speaker 1: to Irvin's California lawsuit, the manager claimed he physically cornered her,
Speaker 1: when in fact they'd never been alone together. Irvin says
Speaker 1: Amazon did nothing about his complaint. In its statement, Amazon
Speaker 1: said that it doesn't tolerate discrimination or harassment and that
Speaker 1: it thoroughly investigates such misconduct. According to Irvin. One day
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty two, when temperatures reached one hundred and
Speaker 1: seven degrees fahrenheit, an Amazon rep complained that his drivers
Speaker 1: were falling behind on their delivery quotas. When he responded
Speaker 1: that Amazon had failed to apply its own policy easing
Speaker 1: workloads during extreme heat, he says, the rep replied that
Speaker 1: it was too late to change the day's assignments and
Speaker 1: that if some drivers were too sick to perform, he'd
Speaker 1: need to provide written affidavits to prove it. Irvin says
Speaker 1: when he told the rep some of the day's cargo
Speaker 1: would just have to wait, the rep threatened him with
Speaker 1: breach of contract. Around the same time, Irvin's employees began
Speaker 1: circulating a petition documenting their own workplace grievances, including about
Speaker 1: the quotas, suggesting the sort of collective action that can
Speaker 1: turn into a union drive. An Amazon rep called Irvin
Speaker 1: and told him they'd heard his drivers were planning a walkout,
Speaker 1: then referred him to attorneys from Ogletree, Deacons, Nash, Smoke
Speaker 1: and Stuart, a law firm specializing in labour strife whose
Speaker 1: costs Amazon was helping DSPs cover. Irvin called a meeting
Speaker 1: with his drivers to discuss their grievances, then told them
Speaker 1: that he would do my best to help, but that
Speaker 1: my hands are sort of tied. He would later testify basically,
Speaker 1: he was just telling us that he's a puppet and
Speaker 1: that his strings are being pulled by Amazon. Former employee
Speaker 1: rajpal Singh recalled at the NLRB trial. He testified that
Speaker 1: Irvin added, if you guys want changes, you guys can
Speaker 1: form a union. Starting in late twenty twenty two, Amazon
Speaker 1: tagged Irvin's company with a series of alleged breaches of contract,
Speaker 1: including failing to pay vendors on time and letting vehicles
Speaker 1: that should have been out of service stay on the road.
Speaker 1: He says that the alleged infractions were based on faulty
Speaker 1: information or caused by Amazon's own mistakes, and that they
Speaker 1: were clearly retaliating against him and his drivers. Around then,
Speaker 1: Irvin says Amazon repeatedly suggested he pull out of his
Speaker 1: contract close to a year ahead of schedule. Channeling Charlton Heston,
Speaker 1: he told the company it could take his DSP from
Speaker 1: my cold dead hands. In February twenty twenty three, Irvin
Speaker 1: received an email from DSP uniform standards at Amazon dot Com,
Speaker 1: saying Amazon would be slashing its per package payment rate
Speaker 1: to battle tested strategies because the share of staff obeying
Speaker 1: Amazon's uniform rules had fallen below ninety five percent for
Speaker 1: the prior several weeks. I believe we are being targeted,
Speaker 1: Irvin wrote back. What are the standard operating procedures that
Speaker 1: you're using? The Amazon account pointed him back to its
Speaker 1: program policies. When Irvin said the company wasn't following its
Speaker 1: own rules, Amazon didn't budge. I want to speak to
Speaker 1: your boss, Irvin said, and a follow up email on
Speaker 1: March fifteenth, You folks are purposefully not listening and causing
Speaker 1: undue stress by not having a proper discussion on this issue.
Speaker 1: I'm telling you I'm being targeted and you're not listening.
Speaker 1: Who are you? What is your boss's name and phone number?
Speaker 1: A month later, Amazon told Irvan it was cutting him
Speaker 1: loose effective in June. Within a week of that news,
Speaker 1: Irvin had let Teamster's organizers come speak to his drivers
Speaker 1: at the start of their shift and sign them up
Speaker 1: on the property. He then became the first DSP owner
Speaker 1: to negotiate and sign a collective bargaining agreement, he says
Speaker 1: he saw no reason not to. In its statement, Amazon
Speaker 1: denied Irvan's account of pushing for heat protections and reduced workloads,
Speaker 1: and said that he violated its safety rules by failing
Speaker 1: to maintain air conditioning in his vans. The company said
Speaker 1: it canned battle tested strategies for violations, including using vehicles
Speaker 1: with faulty breaks. Safety is our top priority, and when
Speaker 1: there were clear violations to their contractual obligations to maintain
Speaker 1: this standard, we did what any reasonable company would do
Speaker 1: and took action to end their contract well before they
Speaker 1: had engaged with the teamsters. In his California lawsuit, Irvin
Speaker 1: claims he was the one who raised concerns about faulty
Speaker 1: AC in the vehicles, and says Amazon failed to address
Speaker 1: the issue. In September twenty twenty four, Joe Biden's NLRB
Speaker 1: issued a complaint against Amazon, arguing that the company wielded
Speaker 1: enough control over Irvin's drivers to be legally considered their boss,
Speaker 1: and that it was therefore obligated to collectively bargain with
Speaker 1: them once he recognized their union. The landmark federal complaint
Speaker 1: also accused Amazon of illegally threatening coercing and retaliating against
Speaker 1: drivers during the months between their organizing and the dissolution
Speaker 1: of battle tested strategies, including by singling out their warehouse
Speaker 1: for stricter inspections, delaying their deliveries, and deploying security guards
Speaker 1: to the property, something it hadn't bothered to do. Driver
Speaker 1: Michael Live would later testify when someone was stealing the
Speaker 1: catalytic converters from their vehicles. A week after Inauguration Day
Speaker 1: twenty twenty five, when Jeff Bezos said, stage left of
Speaker 1: Tim Cook and Elon Musk and in front of incoming
Speaker 1: Cabinet members, President Trump fired the NLRB General Council Jennifer Abruzzo,
Speaker 1: who'd brought the case alleging Amazon was a joint employer.
Speaker 1: In a letter BusinessWeek obtained via FOYA, Trump told Abruso
Speaker 1: and another terminated top appointee he was concerned about their
Speaker 1: disfavoring the interests of employers large and small, and he
Speaker 1: specifically cited their position on joint employment. To replace Abruso
Speaker 1: on an acting basis, Trump tapped William Cowan, who'd served
Speaker 1: as an NLRB member under President George W. Bush. With
Speaker 1: Cowen in charge, the agency, abandoned a slew of claims
Speaker 1: Abruzzo had been prosecuting, including against Apple and SpaceX. Both
Speaker 1: companies have denied wrongdoing in those matters, but Cowen forged
Speaker 1: ahead with some of her initiatives, including the case about
Speaker 1: Irvin's DSP. In an interview with BusinessWeek late last year,
Speaker 1: he said companies that want to limit their liability have
Speaker 1: a simple solution. If an employer wanted wants to avoid
Speaker 1: being a joint employer, stop sticking your nose in another
Speaker 1: employer's business. The Palmdale case, he said, presented a huge
Speaker 1: question both for the teamsters and for Amazon. Over the years,
Speaker 1: he said, other companies have changed their business models to
Speaker 1: directly employ workers once the government determined they'd be held
Speaker 1: liable for their treatment. Regardless, people on all sides of
Speaker 1: the dispute should want to see the case proceed so
Speaker 1: the question of Amazon's responsibility can get a clear answer.
Speaker 1: Cowen argued. It is a big issue, and it has
Speaker 1: implications all over the country. And if I, for example,
Speaker 1: were to say, Okay, well I'm not prosecuting that, I'm
Speaker 1: not buying into that theory, that doesn't really get anything resolved.
Speaker 1: Amazon opened the labor Board trial by telling the judge
Speaker 1: it was refusing to comply with the government's subpoenas. Amazon
Speaker 1: is not willing to participate in the misuse of the
Speaker 1: NLRB's processes, attorney Brian Stolsenbach said at the hearing in
Speaker 1: Los Angeles last September, accusing Cowen's team of subjecting the
Speaker 1: company to a fish expedition in service of a broader agenda.
Speaker 1: Amazon announced it wouldn't share the documents the NLRB was
Speaker 1: seeking to help establish whether it was a joint employer
Speaker 1: of Irvins Drivers, But with Irvin's cooperation, plenty of evidence
Speaker 1: came out. Anyway, We'll be right back with what Trump
Speaker 1: delivered for Amazon. Welcome back to what Trump delivered for Amazon.
Speaker 1: A twenty twenty three version of Amazon's DSP contract entered
Speaker 1: into evidence showed that the company requires its supposedly independent
Speaker 1: contractors to adhere not only to Amazon's program policies at
Speaker 1: the time, but also to whatever future ones the company
Speaker 1: unilaterally imposes, which would then become a part of your
Speaker 1: company's contract with Amazon, as if they were written in
Speaker 1: their entirety in this agreement. Similar provisions are in an
Speaker 1: earlier version of the contract that Bloomberg News reported on
Speaker 1: back in twenty twenty one. Amazon also dictates which vendors
Speaker 1: DSPs can use for every from oil changes to tire rotations,
Speaker 1: as well as when and how vendors can be contacted.
Speaker 1: According to the records released in the case, Amazon assigns
Speaker 1: which packages drivers deliver and the roots they drive to
Speaker 1: do it, and instructs DSPs to tell drivers to trust
Speaker 1: your delivery route even if it may seem circular, because
Speaker 1: each is designed to minimize inefficient maneuvers such as left turns,
Speaker 1: and it knows how those roots are going. Because DSPs
Speaker 1: must give Amazon access to a vast array of data,
Speaker 1: including the live locations of their drivers, which it can
Speaker 1: use without restriction, Amazon requires that DSPs make drivers sign
Speaker 1: non disclosure agreements, submit to arbitration in the event of
Speaker 1: a dispute, and take drug tests when an Amazon rep
Speaker 1: deems appropriate on the job. Drivers, each of whom the
Speaker 1: retailer said represents Amazon to our customers, are required to
Speaker 1: wear Amazon polos and Amazon pants are shorts, with the
Speaker 1: options of an Amazon hat never to be worn backward,
Speaker 1: and an Amazon coat. Amazon also requires that drivers be
Speaker 1: neat and clean, including prevention of unpleasant breath or body odor,
Speaker 1: modest perfume, cologne, and clean teeth, face, ears, fingernails, and hair.
Speaker 1: If Amazon isn't satisfied with a particular driver, it can
Speaker 1: deactivate them unilaterally, terminating their authorization to deliver its packages.
Speaker 1: The documents disgorged by the Battle Tested Strategies case also
Speaker 1: suggest why that might happen. According to company records released
Speaker 1: in the legal case and then obtained by BusinessWeek via Foya,
Speaker 1: Amazon systems use bright yellow, orange, or red to mark
Speaker 1: areas where a driver has spent excessive amounts of time.
Speaker 1: Amazon also formulates performance rankings of DSP drivers and creates
Speaker 1: leaderboards for each DSP owner, ranking each of their staff.
Speaker 1: When things go awry, drivers are supposed to call a
Speaker 1: support hotline staffed by Amazon, not their DSP. A DSP
Speaker 1: must immediately notify Amazon following any net negative interactions with
Speaker 1: customers or the general public, or any other occurrences that
Speaker 1: may impact customer trust of your company or of Amazon.
Speaker 1: If property is damaged, the DSP is barred from further
Speaker 1: contact with the property owner after letting the owner know
Speaker 1: what happened. PERA twenty twenty two Operations Manual, revealed in
Speaker 1: the case, Amazon told DSP owners to be careful what
Speaker 1: they call their company because Amazon may require you to
Speaker 1: change any name it finds offensive or too close to
Speaker 1: its own lingo, for instance, using the word smile, And
Speaker 1: along with providing talking points for DSP owners to use
Speaker 1: at morning meetings with drivers, it directs them to save
Speaker 1: time during those huddles for any presentations Amazon wants to
Speaker 1: make directly to their staff. The newly revealed documents show
Speaker 1: that Amazon offers templates for job postings DSPs can use
Speaker 1: to recruit drivers, and that it has to sign off
Speaker 1: on any new hires hauling its stuff, but it insists
Speaker 1: that the DSPs avoid saying Amazon is hiring, and specifies
Speaker 1: that Amazon can cannot be mentioned if the job ad
Speaker 1: refers to the background checks it requires and insists on reviewing.
Speaker 1: Amazon can reject candidates DSPs wanted to hire based on
Speaker 1: the retailer's own confidential criteria, because the decision being made
Speaker 1: is whether the individual is eligible to deliver to Amazon customers' homes.
Speaker 1: Those who make the cut must undergo a multi day
Speaker 1: training program facilitated by Amazon. Amazon choreographs its deliveries with
Speaker 1: care listing seven steps and specifying that photos of packages
Speaker 1: can't include any part of a human such as a
Speaker 1: stray finger in the frame. It says DSP employees should
Speaker 1: help validate the customer's investment by greeting them with a smile,
Speaker 1: being enthusiastic, and thanking the customer for choosing Amazon. According
Speaker 1: to records shared at trial, Ogletree Deacons, the law firm
Speaker 1: whose costs Amazon subsidized to help DSP's handle labour strife,
Speaker 1: told Irvin in an email that its attorneys helped mitigate
Speaker 1: against the prospect of unionization and noted since Amazon's requirements
Speaker 1: and operations are the cause of many, if not most,
Speaker 1: of the driver's issues and concerns, we need to work
Speaker 1: with them to address those and cannot do it without them.
Speaker 1: Despite all this, Amazon instructs DSPs to emphasize to your
Speaker 1: employees that they work for your company and aren't Amazon employees,
Speaker 1: and to ensure those drivers are careful on social media
Speaker 1: to avoid the mistaken impression that they work for Amazon.
Speaker 1: DSPs are barred from issuing press releases or promotional materials
Speaker 1: that mention Amazon without permission. The DSPs, including bts, are
Speaker 1: essentially captive delivery companies. In LRB attorney Sanamya Seri told
Speaker 1: the judge in September, a parade of ex employees echoed her.
Speaker 1: One lib recalled learning Irvin needed to go to Amazon
Speaker 1: to ask for money. When Lib wanted to raise he
Speaker 1: didn't get it, and said that Amazon promised it would
Speaker 1: remove one of the houses where dogs bit him from
Speaker 1: his root, but never did. Another Dion Steps described getting
Speaker 1: marked down by Amazon for delivering packages too slowly on
Speaker 1: a day when a customer threatened him with a shotgun.
Speaker 1: Steps also recounted being taken off the road by Amazon
Speaker 1: for not completing a required five minute training video, struggling
Speaker 1: for days to log back into Amazon's portal so he
Speaker 1: could watch it, then going weeks without pay while he
Speaker 1: waited for Amazon to reactivate him. Later, when Amazon attorney
Speaker 1: Stolsenbach pressed Steps to agree that he'd never been an
Speaker 1: Amazon employee, Steps responded, I thought I was employed by Amazon.
Speaker 1: Wasn't Irvin's company his employer? The lawyer asked, I didn't
Speaker 1: know they were separate entities. Steps answered, but wasn't battle
Speaker 1: tested strategies the name on his paycheck. At that point,
Speaker 1: Steps lifted his hands in the air and said, I
Speaker 1: usually get direct deposit. Drivers across the country tell similar
Speaker 1: stories in interviews. They say their DSPs turned out to
Speaker 1: be powerless to fix their working conditions, such as quotas
Speaker 1: that some days left them an average of two minutes
Speaker 1: per stop. In ammon parlance, one stop can include multiple
Speaker 1: drop offs of packages at a series of nearby homes,
Speaker 1: or carrying a set of dumbbells up several flights of stairs.
Speaker 1: Amazon also controls the AI powered cameras in drivers vans,
Speaker 1: which are supposed to flag unsafe driving. Drivers say the
Speaker 1: cameras can tag them with undue infractions for yawning or
Speaker 1: drinking water, or just having breasts that obscure the seat
Speaker 1: belt and generally creep them out. Years after Amazon, drivers
Speaker 1: became notorious for having to urinate in bottles as they
Speaker 1: hustle to make their assigned deliveries, another testament to the
Speaker 1: unforgiving quotas. Many drivers say the bottle move remains de
Speaker 1: regueur to obstruct the camera's view of their genitals. Some
Speaker 1: say they re arrange boxes before relieving themselves, According to
Speaker 1: records unearthed in the Battle Tested Strategies case. In talking
Speaker 1: points Amazon provided to DSP owners about the initial introduction
Speaker 1: of the cameras, they're instructed to tell drivers. I can
Speaker 1: assure you that Amazon has taken privacy seriously with this rollout.
Speaker 1: In its statement, Amazon said that drivers are able to
Speaker 1: use the restroom as needed, that its app tells drivers
Speaker 1: where they can find a public bathroom, that its routes
Speaker 1: include several breaks, and that those roots account for geography, traffic,
Speaker 1: and the complexity of stops. There are no fixed quotas,
Speaker 1: and the vast majority of roots are finished on time
Speaker 1: or early. The company said. DSPs determine how many routes
Speaker 1: they run, who they assign those routes to, and they
Speaker 1: are able to work with their teams to adjust stop
Speaker 1: order if they choose. Amazon emphasized that the cameras are
Speaker 1: meant to protect drivers, saying their footage is only reviewed
Speaker 1: by a limited number of trained personnel after a specific
Speaker 1: safety event, and that they can be turned off during breaks.
Speaker 1: DSPs and drivers can dispute any items they feel are
Speaker 1: an inaccurate representation of events, the company said. It also
Speaker 1: said it doesn't expect drivers to deliver at places where
Speaker 1: they don't feel safe, and provides dog avoidance training and
Speaker 1: a way to flag the presence of dogs in its app.
Speaker 1: As for its contract terms, the company said DSPs run
Speaker 1: their own businesses, and the contracts that we have with
Speaker 1: them are pretty common across the industry. To insure safety
Speaker 1: and reliability, It said it doesn't prevent DSPs from having
Speaker 1: additional clients beyond Amazon, or from keeping drivers who aren't
Speaker 1: allowed to deliver Amazon packages on their payroll doing something else.
Speaker 1: When Irvin took the stand to last fall, he described
Speaker 1: the stress of trying to meet Amazon's daily quotas knowing
Speaker 1: his paper package would drop if the company rated his
Speaker 1: performance merely fantastic rather than what it calls fantastic plus.
Speaker 1: He recalled Amazon questioning him during driver's shifts about why
Speaker 1: they were falling behind, telling him they'd stop too much,
Speaker 1: and sometimes going over his head to redeploy other drivers
Speaker 1: to help fulfill their quotas. He testified that his deputy,
Speaker 1: who went on his behalf to a training held by
Speaker 1: Ogletree deacons, told him the instructor there warned that your
Speaker 1: contract would be in danger if your driver's unionized Ogletree
Speaker 1: deacons didn't respond to inquiries. Ervin also testified that Amazon
Speaker 1: coaches regularly dictated his company's business targets. They'd say we
Speaker 1: think this is a good goal, and I'd say I don't,
Speaker 1: and they say, well, you need to do it anyway,
Speaker 1: he said. After Irvin testified about Amazon's extensive access to
Speaker 1: battle tested strategies financial records, a teamster's attorney asked, do
Speaker 1: you have reciprocal access to Amazon's Irvin answered no. During
Speaker 1: cross examination, Stolzenbach, the Amazon attorney, pointed out that though
Speaker 1: Irvin had told drivers who'd asked for raises that he
Speaker 1: needed to check with Amazon about getting more money to
Speaker 1: afford them, nothing in Irvin's contract stopped him from bringing
Speaker 1: worker pay up to twenty five dollars an hour by
Speaker 1: handing them the difference out of his own pocket. Stolsenbach
Speaker 1: suggested Amazon's relationship with Irvin had been, in a way
Speaker 1: like Irvin's relationship with contractors he hired for various tasks
Speaker 1: when battle tested strategies contracted for services or products from
Speaker 1: another company. Did battle tested strategies expect that of company
Speaker 1: to live up to the contract? He asked, The expectations
Speaker 1: that I would have if I purchased something would be yeah,
Speaker 1: they give me the item, Irvin answered, but I wouldn't
Speaker 1: bully them. The agency's prosecutors were closer than they'd ever
Speaker 1: been to securing a ruling that would hold Amazon liable
Speaker 1: for its contract drivers. Then they abruptly retreated. A week
Speaker 1: before Christmas, the US Senate confirmed Crystal Kerrey, a partner
Speaker 1: at the management side law firm Morgan Lewis and Bacchias,
Speaker 1: to take over for Cowen as the NLRB's general counsel.
Speaker 1: Carrie had represented Amazon as an attorney at Morgan Lewis,
Speaker 1: where Amazon is still a client. Her nomination drew condemnation
Speaker 1: from the Teamsters union, whose president had given a high
Speaker 1: profile speech at the twenty twenty four Republican National Convention.
Speaker 1: It also attracted skepticism from Republican Josh Hawley of Missouri,
Speaker 1: who questioned whether Kerrie would enforce precedents such as a
Speaker 1: landmark twenty twenty four ruling against her former client Amazon
Speaker 1: that banned mandatory anti union captive audios meetings. In the end,
Speaker 1: Hawley voted for her too. In a February interview with BusinessWeek,
Speaker 1: Carrie said the ethics agreement she signed when she took
Speaker 1: the NLRB job didn't require her to recuse herself from
Speaker 1: Amazon controversies, including the Battle Tested Strategies case, because a
Speaker 1: year had elapsed since she'd represented the retailer, and though
Speaker 1: her firm still did, it wasn't doing so in that
Speaker 1: particular case. Recusal, she said, was matter specific. Asked if
Speaker 1: she considered that standard sufficient, Carrie said she'd been working
Speaker 1: very closely with the agency's ethics office and getting its
Speaker 1: staff's recommendations to the extent that I have a question.
Speaker 1: While Morgan Lewis doesn't represent Amazon in the NLRB case,
Speaker 1: it's defending the company against Irvan's California lawsuit, which also
Speaker 1: alleges the company wielded extensive control over Battle Tested Strategies.
Speaker 1: Amazon has gotten that case moved into arbitration. An NLRB
Speaker 1: spokesperson declined to comment further. On April twelve, the day
Speaker 1: before testimony was set to resume in the NLRB trial,
Speaker 1: one of Kerrie's attorneys since the judge a proposed settlement
Speaker 1: her office had hashed out with Amazon. Under the agreement,
Speaker 1: Amazon would give Irvin's former drivers two weeks pay and
Speaker 1: post a notice at the warehouse promising not to threaten
Speaker 1: or retaliate against workers there without conceding anything about whether
Speaker 1: it employed them, it wouldn't admit any wrongdoing and wouldn't
Speaker 1: be considered a joint employer. A hastily organized zoom meeting
Speaker 1: the next day gave off light hostage video vibes. Yeserr,
Speaker 1: the NLRB lawyer who'd opened the trial with tough talk
Speaker 1: about accountability, now explained that, at the direction of the
Speaker 1: General Council Carrie, she was seeking approval of the settlement,
Speaker 1: which Amazon had already blessed. Yessar's voice quivered, and she
Speaker 1: mostly looked down at her notes as she spoke. Midway through,
Speaker 1: she shook her head a bit and paused for a
Speaker 1: few seconds before saying, even though Amazon wouldn't be found
Speaker 1: liable as a joint employer, that was no reason to
Speaker 1: reject the settlement, because because a finding of liability wouldn't
Speaker 1: necessarily lead to any specific remedy Anyway, while the Labor
Speaker 1: Board had ruled that Amazon broke the law elsewhere, including
Speaker 1: violating a settlement, she noted that there had been no
Speaker 1: such judgment about that particular Palmdell warehouse. Sulzenbach echoed Yasari's arguments,
Speaker 1: saying it was in the worker's best interest to get
Speaker 1: paid now, rather than let the case go on several
Speaker 1: more years as Amazon went through as many appeals as necessary.
Speaker 1: He added, if the Court of Appeals didn't agree with Amazon,
Speaker 1: Amazon would ask the Supreme Court to consider the case.
Speaker 1: Settling would save the agency's strained resources for other cases,
Speaker 1: he argued. When it was her turn to speak, Julie
Speaker 1: Gutman Dickinson, a lawyer for the Teamsters, denounced the settlement
Speaker 1: as an ambush, an ineffectual deal that capitulates to Amazon
Speaker 1: courtesy of a general counsel beholdened to corporate billionaires, including
Speaker 1: her former client, rather than helping triage. Gutman Dickinson said
Speaker 1: letting Amazon keep evading responsibility for its drivers would undermine
Speaker 1: labor law enforcement nationwide. This unilateral settlement makes clear to
Speaker 1: workers across the country that Amazon is above the law.
Speaker 1: On May eighteenth, the Agency judge considering the case ruled
Speaker 1: that the deal should be approved, noting that under NLRB precedent,
Speaker 1: the General Council's support for the settlement agreement is an
Speaker 1: important consideration. On May twenty eighth, the union filed a
Speaker 1: motion to appeal that ruling to the Labour Board members
Speaker 1: in Washington, a panel that is mostly made up of
Speaker 1: Trump appointees. The evidence Amazon was a joint employer is
Speaker 1: unusually strong, says Boston University law professor Andrew Elmore, a
Speaker 1: former Section chief in the New York Attorney General's Office
Speaker 1: who's reviewed hundreds of companies vendor and franchise contracts. I
Speaker 1: am unaware of any other case that has revealed so
Speaker 1: much about the relationship between Amazon and its DSPs, He says.
Speaker 1: Failing to arrive at that final determination seems to be
Speaker 1: a signal to companies that they can go ahead and
Speaker 1: create contractual relationships like this without fear. For now, the
Speaker 1: Teamsters union and its allies are pushing bills in New
Speaker 1: York City and Chicago that could destabilize the DSP model
Speaker 1: in a different way by requiring companies such as Amazon
Speaker 1: to classify delivery drivers who work within their city limits
Speaker 1: as direct employees. The New York bill has been sponsored
Speaker 1: by the majority of the City Council and is endorsed
Speaker 1: by Mayor Zoron Mamdani's Worker Protection Agency. Amazon said in
Speaker 1: its statement that its concern the New York legislation would
Speaker 1: endanger jobs and harm customers by forcing US to consider
Speaker 1: relocating delivery operations outside of the city. In April, hundreds
Speaker 1: of Amazon drivers and activists, some supporting the bill, some
Speaker 1: opposing it, showed up in Manhattan to hold dueling rallies
Speaker 1: and then pack the City Council's chambers as lawmakers heard
Speaker 1: testimony from both sides. In interviews outside the hearing, several
Speaker 1: DSP owners said that they saw themselves as partners with Amazon,
Speaker 1: and that the company had been responsive when they suggested changes.
Speaker 1: Amazon They do check to make sure sure we're being
Speaker 1: compliant with all the laws in everything, said DSP owner
Speaker 1: Christine Chan, But I run my own business, She compared
Speaker 1: the relationship to fast food franchising. Several delivery workers outside
Speaker 1: the hearing told Business Week that they'd been paid and
Speaker 1: encouraged by their DSPs to demonstrate against the bill, and
Speaker 1: that they were worried they'd lose their jobs if it passed.
Speaker 1: I was informed that my livelihood was at stake, and
Speaker 1: I had to show up, said one driver, who spoke
Speaker 1: on condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation. It's hard
Speaker 1: to get a job out here. The rallies took place
Speaker 1: a couple of weeks after Amazon launched a contest for
Speaker 1: DSP drivers around the country, offering one thousand dollars prizes
Speaker 1: and VIP experiences for those with the best stories about
Speaker 1: why they loved their job. The contest rules said winning
Speaker 1: entries would be chosen based on criteria, including genuine, specific
Speaker 1: details that feel real and lived in. Amazon said in
Speaker 1: its statement that the contest is meant to celebrate drivers
Speaker 1: around the country and denied that it was more motivated
Speaker 1: by any external factors. Some drivers have continued trying to
Speaker 1: organize with the teamsters, who've announced they've signed up majorities
Speaker 1: of employees at a couple dozen DSPs in California, Georgia, Illinois,
Speaker 1: and New York for union drives. No other DSP owners, however,
Speaker 1: have agreed to recognize the union, nor has Amazon. Workers
Speaker 1: say Amazon and DSPs have responded with a barrage of
Speaker 1: tactics to dissuade them from unionizing, including by deploying anti
Speaker 1: union consultants to ride along with drivers, posting propaganda above
Speaker 1: the warehouse's urinals, and giving away twenty dollars Amazon gift cards.
Speaker 1: Irvin and the teamsters say they hear from other frustrated
Speaker 1: DSPs who aren't ready to publicly knock the company. In November,
Speaker 1: a group calling itself DSPs for Equitable and Fair Treatment
Speaker 1: went public, aiming to organize like minded business owners, but
Speaker 1: its organizers remain anonymous for fear of retaliation. In its statement,
Speaker 1: Amazon said that the vast majority of DSPs run successful,
Speaker 1: profitable businesses, and that the percentage who voluntarily leave the
Speaker 1: program remains in the single digits. The company said that
Speaker 1: to help workers get the truth in the face of
Speaker 1: pro union misinformation or intimidation, it brings in experts to
Speaker 1: share objective facts about what it actually means to have
Speaker 1: an external party take their voice. It said there is
Speaker 1: no evidence showing the Teamsters have secured union cards from
Speaker 1: majorities of workers at any DSP. The Teamsters have filed
Speaker 1: complaints with the NLRB, accusing Amazon of terminating contracts with
Speaker 1: several DSPs because the workers organized. The fate of those
Speaker 1: cases now also rests with Kerry, whose other recent pivots
Speaker 1: on the agency's behalf include overriding the United Auto Workers'
Speaker 1: objections to settle a case over alleged union busting by
Speaker 1: Mercedes Benz before a high stakes election in twenty twenty
Speaker 1: four and abandoning a push by Cowan to overturn a
Speaker 1: union's defeat at Wells Fargo because of the bank's alleged
Speaker 1: illegal interference with workers' rights. Mercedes Benz and Wells Fargo
Speaker 1: have denied wrongdoing, as has Amazon. One of the DSP
Speaker 1: drivers pushing for the New York Bill, Jerome Sloss, has
Speaker 1: spoken in front of City Hall about being homeless while
Speaker 1: working for Amazon. There's no way to do it safely
Speaker 1: and on time. Sloss says he'd started organizing at his
Speaker 1: DSP because he realized Amazon's official channel for driver input
Speaker 1: might as well be toilet paper that they wiped their
Speaker 1: ass with, and he figured drivers needed to take matters
Speaker 1: into their own hands. Nobody was coming to save us.
Speaker 1: Amazon said in its statement that it values and acts
Speaker 1: on driver feedback. Irvin says his ordeal as a DSP
Speaker 1: owner upended his life and his finances. I've gone through
Speaker 1: a lot in the last few years, he said during
Speaker 1: cross examination, including losing his house. I'm a little in shambles,
Speaker 1: even though it may not look like it. His California
Speaker 1: lawsuit alleges he suffered humiliation and anguish because of his
Speaker 1: dealings with Amazon, but Irvin says He's glad he stood
Speaker 1: up for himself and his drivers. Though those pearly gates,
Speaker 1: whoever's up there, if somebody's up there, they're not like,
Speaker 1: hey man, how many packages did you deliver? He says,
Speaker 1: Amazon's narrow fixation on being customer obsessed comes with major costs.
Speaker 1: A lot of my drivers are Amazon customers too. It
Speaker 1: would be fantastic if Amazon were obsessed with them. While
Speaker 1: navigating the ups and downs of the legal cases, Irvin
Speaker 1: has also been working to get a new business off
Speaker 1: the ground, one he calls battle tested foods. He recently
Speaker 1: got his first big break. He'll be a popcorn supplier
Speaker 1: for Walmart.