Amazon’s spending on labor consultants soared to $14.2 million last year amid its effort to quash union drives within the company, according to a Labor Department filing.
That’s more than triple the total from the previous year, when Amazon first began to confront organizing efforts at its warehouses. An Amazon warehouse in Staten Island became the first to unionize in April 2022, but the e-commerce giant successfully quashed organizing efforts at other locations.
Large corporations frequently hire anti-union consultants who craft and carry out strategies to persuade workers against voting to form a union.
Amazon held numerous anti-union meetings that workers were required to attend and plastered “vote no” posters at its warehouses — both common tactics. A federal judge ruled in January that Amazon violated labor laws by threatening to withhold wage increases if workers voted to form a union.
Amazon wrote in the filing that the consultants were hired to assist the company in “expressing the company’s opinion on union representation, and to educate employees about the issues, election process and their rights under the law.”
Amazon spokesperson Eileen Hards said that the usually large union elections at Amazon facilities required increased communications with workers. She added that Amazon in September invested $1 billion into higher hourly wages for customer fulfillment and transportation roles.
“So—like many other companies—we also work to ensure our employees are fully informed about their rights and how decisions about outside representation could impact their day-to-day lives working at Amazon,” Hards said.
The company’s spending on anti-union consultants dwarfs that of other companies. Starbucks was the top spender in 2021, shelling out $4.3 million, while the next highest figure came in at less than $2.7 million, according to a new report from the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute.
The Economic Policy Institute estimated that companies spend more than $400 million annually on anti-union consultants. But the think tank noted that the data is incomplete because loopholes in the law allow companies to avoid disclosing their spending by stating that consultants are merely providing “advice.”
Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) told former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz last week that the company is refusing to disclose its spending to anti-union law firm Littler Mendelson. The coffee chain has drawn criticism from lawmakers for its anti-union tactics that in some cases have drawn labor law violations.
“And guess what, under federal law, Starbucks is able to write off those costs as a run-of-the-mill business expense, meaning taxpayers are subsidizing union-busting in the United States,” Casey said.
Updated 3 p.m.