A National Labor Relations Board judge ruled on Wednesday that Amazon CEO Andy Jassy violated federal labor law through comments he made to various media outlets regarding unionization efforts within the company. NLRB Administrative Law Judge Brian Gee pointed to interviews Jassy conducted in 2022 with CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” Bloomberg Television, and at The New York Times’ DealBook conference as evidence. These interviews occurred during a period of increased union campaigns within Amazon’s warehouse and delivery operations.
In an April 2022 interview with CNBC, Jassy expressed concerns that if employees were to opt for unionization, it could potentially diminish their empowerment in the workplace and lead to a slower and more bureaucratic environment. Similarly, during the Bloomberg interview, Jassy noted that under a union framework, employees might encounter obstacles in directly addressing improvements for their team, themselves, or their customers with management.
During the DealBook conference, Jassy asserted that in the absence of a union, the workplace remains non-bureaucratic and fast-paced. Judge Gee interpreted these remarks as a threat to employees, suggesting that unionization would diminish their empowerment and impede their ability to efficiently accomplish tasks.
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) lodged the complaint against Amazon and Jassy in October 2022. In his Wednesday ruling, Judge Gee determined that certain comments made by Jassy, suggesting that unionization would alter the dynamic between workers and their employer, were permissible under labor law. However, he deemed other remarks by the Amazon chief, indicating that employees would experience reduced empowerment and would be “better off” without a union, to be in violation of labor law. Gee explained that these statements exceeded the bounds of merely discussing the employee-employer relationship.
In a statement, Amazon spokesperson Mary Kate Paradis expressed the company’s disagreement with the NLRB’s ruling and confirmed their intention to appeal. Paradis emphasized that the decision casts a negative light on the current state of free speech rights and conveyed optimism about the prospect of continuing to engage in constructive discussions on these matters, ensuring that all viewpoints are heard.
The judge suggests that Amazon should be directed to refrain from making similar comments in the future and proposes that the company be mandated to disseminate a notice about the order to its employees nationwide.
