Thousands of Amazon Flex delivery drivers filed arbitration claims on Tuesday, alleging that their classification as independent contractors has resulted in unpaid wages, and the loss of overtime pay and expense reimbursements.
Approximately 15,860 Amazon Flex drivers across California, Illinois and Massachusetts submitted the claims with the American Arbitration Association, on top of an additional 453 similar cases that are already being litigated.
More from Sourcing Journal
-
How Amazon Is Educating Consumers About the Cotton Levi's Uses
-
East Coast Port Union Wants Wage Hikes 'Commensurate' With USMX Revenues
The claims, collected over a span of four years by attorneys Joseph Sellers and Steven Tindall, contend that the drivers should be classified as Amazon employees instead of independent contractors .
Amazon Flex is the tech titan’s “gig economy” package delivery service, in which drivers can use a mobile app to sign up for shifts to deliver orders via the Prime Now and Amazon Fresh programs in their own vehicles.
Most Amazon Flex drivers earn between $18 and $25 per hour, although actual earnings are dependent on factors including location, tips received and length of time to complete deliveries.
One such argument for employee classification came from a driver that indicated that Amazon does not provide Flex drivers with 10-minute rest breaks when their shift lasts longer than 3.5 hours. Another claim said Amazon does not provide 30-minute meal breaks for drivers who work more than five hours a day, whereas another claim alleged that Amazon fails to provide itemized wage statements required by California law.
Additionally, if a Flex driver books a three-hour block on the app, they only get paid for three hours, even if deliveries come in that take more time, one claim alleged.
“The vast majority of Amazon Flex delivery partners finish their delivery blocks early,” an Amazon spokesperson told Sourcing Journal. “Amazon Flex delivery partners have the freedom to take breaks, stop to pick up their kids, run errands and work however they want.”
In a statement, Amazon said Flex “gives individuals the opportunity to set their own schedule and be their own boss, while earning competitive pay.”
All of the claims were made by drivers in California, Illinois and Massachusetts, all of which have rules that limit the amount of control companies can exert over independent contractors.
The definition and rights of a contract worker versus an employee has been up for debate in laws such as California’s Prop 22, which allows ride hailing and delivery drivers to be treated as independent contractors with some added benefits, including a minimum earnings guarantee.
The company has had battles with its Flex drivers in the past, and lost. Amazon had to fork over more than $61.7 million to settle Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charges after the agency found the company short changed Flex drivers in tips over a two-and-a-half year period.
The settlement prohibited Amazon from misrepresenting driver earnings, pay or percent of tips paid to drivers or changing its handling of tips without drivers’ consent.
Court tosses order that stopped Amazon from firing union backers
While Amazon contends with this slew of arbitration claims, the e-commerce giant got a major labor win Wednesday, when a Manhattan appeals court threw out a 2022 order that had previously prevented the company from terminating union supporters.
U.S. District Judge Diane Gujarati issued the order in November 2022, which required Amazon to cease retaliation, including terminating, against pro-union employees, in response to the 2020 firing of Gerald Bryson , an Amazon union organizer who was terminated after a protest of alleged unsafe Covid-19 protocols in Amazon’s “JFK8” Staten Island warehouse.
The judge issued the order at the request of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which accused Amazon of illegally firing Bryson.
Amazon has long held that it fired Bryson over his conduct at the protest and not because of his support for unionization, saying he violated the company’s vulgar-language policy by entering a dispute with a coworker at the demonstration.
Two years later, the JFK8 warehouse became the first U.S. Amazon facility to successfully unionize .
At the time of Gujarati’s ruling, the judge said Bryson’s firing violated his rights under U.S. labor law, leading her to bar Amazon from firing other union supporters. But the judge refused to order Amazon to reinstate Bryson, saying there was no evidence that his firing deterred other workers from unionizing.
But in the Wednesday ruling, a three-judge panel ruled that the requirement that Amazon not fire other workers was unnecessary if there was no evidence that Bryson’s firing had a broader impact.
“The district court abused its discretion in issuing the cease-and-desist order without adequately explaining why that relief was just and proper,” the panel ruled. “Sufficient explanation was particularly necessary because the district court concluded, based on the same record, that other, closely related relief was not just and proper. We therefore vacate in part the district court’s injunction.”
Sourcing Journal reached out to Amazon.
