Skip to main content

A Round of Applause for the Amazon Labor Union

While the unionization of Amazon’s Staten Island warehouse hasn’t exactly gone unnoticed, it has struggled for attention in the hyperactive news cycles of recent days and weeks.

So please, let’s have a warm round of applause for the workers of warehouse JFK8.

They forced a real union election, sponsored by the National Labor Relations Board, fiercely resisted by Amazon. They started as a small cadre of workers with a lot of gripes, no budget, no organizing experience, and the constant threat of retaliation from a highly vindicative and litigious employer.

And they flat-out kicked ass. They convinced fifty-five percent of their co-workers — a landslide, apparently — that they needed to speak with one collective voice, if they ever want Amazon to hear them. They created a new union, the Amazon Labor Union (ALU), completely from scratch.

Organized labor in this country has, as we know, been pummelled into submission. Forty years of right-wing hostility, aided and abetted by the Republican party, has drastically reduced the economic and political clout unions once enjoyed. Through sharp-elbowed tactics at the local, state, and federal levels, Republican administrations have systematically undermined collective bargaining and the right to organize, always for specious — not to mention predatory — reasons.

But what we’re seeing might just be the first glimmer of a labor resurgence, knock wood. It’s a real grassroots movement, independent of any organized initiatives. It’s emphatically not coming from Big Labor — that crippled but still powerful coalition under the AFL-CIO umbrella — but seems to be rising organically from the workers themselves.

This development has led to some soul-searching among the professional Big Labor organizers, the ones who have, for decades, been swimming against the brutally strong currents of anti-union activism. These organizers, to their credit, have watched with admiration the launch of a growing number of fledgling union movements, and they’ve wisely refrained from imposing their “experience” on the newbies. While Amazon JFK8 is getting the most media coverage, there are other examples of similar bottom-up unionizations, most notably in several Starbucks locations.

The unionization of JFK8 was driven by the real needs of real workers on a real warehouse floor — a workplace where sophisticated digital systems monitor their every move. So the movement isn’t just about wages and hours — though those are surely on the table — but also about workplace safety, worker health, job protection, and a host of other issues management will happily ignore until forced to acknowledge them.

The ALU deftly worked around the legion of high-priced corporate lawyers and labor consultants Amazon hires to keep the playing field well tilted. Starting with their own unique understanding of the processes, complexities, and social dynamics of Amazon’s highly diverse workforce, they reached out to their thousands of co-workers and listened to their stories.

They engaged individually with workers from a kaleidoscope of multi-cultural backgrounds. They learned to “speak the language” of the many informal subgroups within the warehouse, earning both their trust and, crucially, their signatures.

Which is how they were able to meet Amazon’s brute-force, take-no-prisoners tactics with a nimbleness and finesse that has taken the worlds of both labor and management quite by surprise.

Of course, Amazon has always known it doesn’t have to be this way. Amazon makes astronomical amounts of money, and even a minuscule percentage of its profits could have made its workers’ lives incomparably easier.

They could have been an exceptional employer. They could have shown loyalty to their workers, and received loyalty in return. Instead they chose to exploit. They adopted a dehumanizing worker model, in which interchangeable humans can be plugged into or out of any job, with only minimal respect or concern for the well-being of those humans.

The pandemic threw a big monkey wrench into this model. On one hand, demand for Amazon services exploded. On the other hand, workplace safety was suddenly a life-and-death matter.

Suddenly, people all over the country, in every sort of workplace, were deciding that the paltry wages and demeaning conditions they were putting up with weren’t worth the risk to their lives. Suddenly, the humans were unplugging, and replacement humans weren’t readily available.

This tightening of the job market has spelled opportunity for the labor movement. Unions have much more leverage when the marketplace won’t let management just fire and replace people on a whim.

And unions need all the leverage they can get. Of all the things we’ve lost sight of in the last few decades — of all the things we took for granted, and which somehow stopped being important — unions are near the top of the list.

The crushing of organized labor in recent decades has had a warping effect on our economy, our politics, our ethics, and, indeed, the basic social contract we live by. It has caused and aggravated grotesque inequalities, and served to ensure that the few remain firmly in control of the many.

It hasn’t always been this way. The union movement goes back more than a century and was once embedded in the fabric of American culture. The long history and colorful language of organized labor — of strikes, lockouts, strike-breakers, scabs, and Pinkertons — were once the stuff of legend. My mother and her friends grew up singing union songs — memorized from Pete Seeger records — around their campfires and on their campuses.

By then, collective bargaining had long since forced a whole range of outrageous ideas on corporate America — eight-hour days, forty-hour weeks, paid vacations, sick leave, and other crazy things that have gone vastly under-appreciated, both for the achievements they are, and for the blood that was shed to win them.

You could say unions invented the middle class. They held out the promise of a living wage — and the dignity that comes with it — to anyone willing to work. Not coincidentally, the nation prospered as a result.

Yes, the record of unions on racial and women’s issues has surely been as appalling as that of every other institution in American life. But the actions at JFK8, largely driven by minority workers, would seem to indicate significant progress on that front.

As institutions go, organized labor still has much to offer us as a society, but we can’t be na├»ve. The small victories at Amazon and Starbucks may yet turn out to be false hopes. Amazon’s lawyers may yet crush the ALU.

But this new grassroots, bottom-up approach can, at least theoretically, be extended to the Walmarts, Home Depots, and Googles of the world. Which, though they’d never admit it, would be to the benefit of those companies as well.

Because given the stakes, given the multitude of hazards in today’s global marketplace, a strong working relationship between management and labor is imperative for both.

For some reason, management never learns that lesson on its own. Unions always end up having to force it on them.

 

Comments

  1. Back when the old-school unions were formed, the exploitation was unabated. Since then, many laws and regulations have been put in place to protect workers from things that only the unions used manage for them. If modern unions are going to make a real difference in regrowing the middle class, they need to tackle medical and post-secondary education costs. While they're at it, maybe they could come up with a better retirement system than "give your money to some of the greediest people on the planet and hope they give you some back when they're done with it."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Totally agree. Unfortunately, those protections need protection. One of our two political parties would roll them back till they disappear.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Elise Stefanik Wants to be Your President

It isn’t often that The New York Times and The Washington Post do lengthy features on the same politician in the same week. So when Elise Stefanik was given several thousand words in two major papers, my curiosity was duly piqued. The two pieces ( here and here ) are similar profiles of Stefanik, age 38, and her remarkable transformation from Harvard-educated “moderate” Republican, to ultra-MAGA ideologue. The subhead of the Times article states the theme of both: To rise through the Trump-era G.O.P., a young congresswoman gave up her friends, her mentors and her ideals. So how does a double feature like this happen, especially when there’s no immediate news driving it? Stefanik was not in the spotlight, though it was clear she would soon be taking a leading role in the new GOP House majority. So it could just be the coincidence of two reporters intuitively seizing on the same story. It happens. But it could also be that Stefanik herself, working with a clever publicist, set o

The Trump-Putin Bromance is Getting Another Look

The arrest last week of Charles McGonigal, former head of counterintelligence for the FBI, may or may not prove to be a watershed moment in our understanding of the Trump-Putin conspiracy. It’s still early, and the depths of the story have yet to be plumbed. So I’m not going to weigh in on that (you can read about it here ), except to note that people who’ve been watching the Trump-Russia show for over a decade are now going back to their notes and timelines, looking at old events in light of new information. And the more we all look, the more the miasma of Russian subterfuge stinks up every narrative. If a murderous oligarch, Oleg Deripaska, could actually recruit the FBI agent who’d investigated him — which the McGonigal affair will apparently show — who knows what else was going on? There is, I think, the need for some sort of “unified field theory” of the Trump-Putin relationship. There is much that we’re missing on at least three separate tracks of that bizarre bromance: Tru

Another Rousing Comeback for Antisemitism

I was in my late twenties in the late seventies, a single man sitting in a piano bar on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. It was St. Patrick’s Day, and I was in friendly conversation with an older Irish couple, there to celebrate their history. He wore a green tie, she a green blouse. Alcohol was involved. The conversation was free flowing, as random encounters with amiable strangers can be. When the talk turned to history, which can happen on St. Patrick’s Day, I put forth the notion — stolen, I think, from a Leon Uris novel I’d recently read — that the Irish and the Jews had much in common, that their shared history of oppression bonded them, that their experience of suffering and privation was deeply imbued in both their cultures. Not an especially profound insight, but the husband — to the surprise not just of me, but of his wife as well — was having none of it. In his sloshed but strident state, he insisted that the suffering of Jews couldn’t possibly be compared to what the I