Amazon scores big win at NLRB over whether it’s a joint employer with DSPs

At issue is a complaint filed in September 2024 by the regional director of the NLRB’s Region 31, a geographic area that includes the Amazon DAX8 facility in Palmdale, California. 

The complaint was over Amazon’s actions toward a DSP called Battle Tested Strategies (BTS) that operated out of DAX8. BTS is believed to be the only DSP where its rank-and-file voted to be represented by a union–the Teamsters–and where the DSP owners recognized the vote. 

BTS’ agreement to operate as an Amazon DSP was terminated in June 2023. Amazon has denied the charge that the cancellation was because of the union recognition.

Amazon said in a statement to FreightWaves that BTS’ contract was “terminated for repeated safety violations, including use of vehicles with faulty brakes and out of service vehicles, as well as failure to pay their insurance provider.”

The resulting investigation by the regional director led to the complaint that, as ALJ Ramirez said in her review of the earlier proceedings, “at all material times, Amazon and BTS have been joint employers of BTS’s employees working at the DAX8 facility.”

Given that position of joint employer, according to Judge Ramirez’ summary of the case, and because BTS had recognized the Teamsters, “Amazon was required to recognize and bargain with the Union.”

Hearings began in September and continued on and off into 2026. 

Union had been on a roll

The process had been moving in the Teamsters’ direction. A late 2025 attempt by Amazon to block the process was halted by the Ninth Federal Circuit.

Even with a change in administration, the NLRB stuck to its argument that Amazon was a joint employer with its DSPs at the start of the hearing process in September, according to reporting by Bloomberg, 

The news in April that Amazon and the NLRB General Counsel had reached an agreement that would settle the action without any precedent-setting finding about Amazon as a joint employer with a DSP marked a significant change in policy by the agency.

Teamsters seeks an appeal

Reports of that tentative settlement in April brought quick legal protest from the Teamsters. Now that the agreement has the blessing of an ALJ, the union is fighting back harder.

“Settling the instant charges on the terms unilaterally negotiated by the General Counsel is a complete affront to the National Labor Relations Act,” the Teamsters said in its request to file an appeal. 

The union argues the settlement “fails mightily under the principles set forth in Independent Stave,” a precedent that governs the NLRB’s ability to recognize private settlements between parties with a case before the board.

The union also said the deal with Amazon would “jeopardize basic…rights of not only the Palmdale employees who are deprived of any effective remedy for Amazon’s egregious violations of the Act, but of Amazon employees across the country who will receive the message that their employer is above the law.”

“The Settlement will injure the rights of all employees nationwide by broadcasting to employers that they can similarly violate the Act with impunity and eventually reach a sweetheart deal absolving them of any real responsibility,” the union said in its request.

The initial complaint, in addition to labeling Amazon a joint employer, also contained numerous allegations of unfair labor practices at DAX8, including (according to the union) “hiring security guards in response to employees’ protected concerted activity.”

DSP model an ‘existential threat’

And in a passage that Amazon might agree with, at least in terms of how important the case might end up being, the Teamsters say “without a finding—or admission—that Amazon is a joint employer of the Amazon delivery drivers necessary to its very existence, the DSP model will continue to pose an existential threat to the Act and to employees’ most basic rights.”

In a statement released to FreightWaves, an Amazon spokesman said “None of the Teamsters’ claims in this matter were found to be true, and we’re glad to put it behind us so we can focus on supporting our team, our partners – including Delivery Service Partners—and the communities we collectively serve. Judge Ramirez looked at this carefully and found the settlement reasonable, noted major gaps in the case, and rejected the Teamsters’ claims. “

The owner of BTS, Johnathon Ervin, who ultimately signed off on the decision to recognize the union, sent an email to the NLRB during the process stating his opposition to the settlement.

Under the deal, workers at BTS between April 2023 and June 2023 are entitled to two weeks pay for each driver and dispatcher employed as of May 20, 2023.

The number of individuals that meet the test is estimated at 84. 

Small tab to end the process

If the workers’ pay was $1,500 per week, or $3,000 for the two weeks, and all 84 claimed it for those two weeks, it would be a payout of about $250,000 for Amazon, a pittance for a victory in swatting back the process that at one point seemed to be headed toward a declaration that the company is a joint employer with its DSPs.

According to Judge Ramirez, May 20 is the date that BTS saw its routes reduced by Amazon, which the union alleges is because of the recognition of the Teamsters’ vote to represent the workers.

There are other provisions in the agreement. But the most important, according to Judge Ramirez, “includes a nonadmission clause specifically disclaiming Amazon’s joint employer status.”

But Judge Ramirez said in her decision that under the Independent Stave precedent, the issues raised by the Teamsters regarding joint employer status do not warrant her rejecting the settlement between the NLRB general counsel and Amazon.

More articles by John Kingston

Texas court nixes shipper liability in Home Depot/Werner case

Carrier Nussbaum sets driver pay increase; others popping up more quietly

Intrastate delivery worker can be ruled interstate in dispute: SCOTUS