Amazon faces the biggest unionisation drive the dotcom sector has
ever seen. Mike Arrowsmith reports
Tumbling technology share prices are leaving the surviving
e-commerce companies facing a unique set of difficulties. Share
options, a perk only for board members in bricks-and-mortar
companies, have been more widespread in the new e-economy.
With many of those options now virtually worthless, e-commerce
companies are facing disgruntled employees - a situation which
trade unions are trying to cash in on.
Amazon, one of the most high-profile and successful dotcoms
ever, is facing the most ambitious unionisation drive ever
undertaken in the high-technology sector.
The company has experienced explosive growth over the past
couple of years - with forecast sales of $2.7bn in 2000 and 25
million customers worldwide. At its heart is a large logistics and
retail operation - and it is these staff who are a target for trade
unions.
Amazon's share price has lost two-thirds of its value in the
past year, and layoffs have eliminated 2% of the company's
jobs.
Unions cite job insecurity, mandatory overtime, holiday
restrictions and sudden shift changes as key issues boosting their
membership drive.
The Communications Workers of America has begun a campaign to
unionise 400 customer-service representatives at Amazon's Seattle
headquarters.
The United Food and Commercial Workers Union and the Prewitt
Organising Fund, an independent organising group, are also
attempting to unionise some 5,000 workers at Amazon's eight
distribution centres across the country. The campaign has been
launched to coincide with the lucrative Christmas season.
Publicly, Amazon is unconcerned: "It's not the first time they
have tried to organise. It's nothing new," said company spokeswoman
Patty Smith. "We hired intelligent and dedicated employees, and we
trust them to make decisions about what's best for their future,
but obviously we don't believe a union is best for their future or
our customers."
However, internally Amazon has responded robustly to the
campaign. Over the past two weeks, Amazon customer service workers
in Seattle, called "associates" by the company, have been invited
by managers to a series of "all hands" meetings, where the case
against unionisation has been made.
"Inform reps of the disadvantages of joining a union, including
the possibility of strikes, serving on picket lines, fines and
dues," wrote one company executive to Amazon supervisors.
The company has also set up a section on their internal Web site
- the main purpose of which, according to Smith, is to clarify to
supervisors what they can do legally to oppose a union and provide
information on the benefits workers already enjoy.
"Unions limit associate incentives. Merit increases are contrary
to union philosophy," the Web site said. "Unions actively foster
distrust toward supervisors. A union promotes and thrives upon
problems between supervisors and employees. Front-line supervisors
who deal effectively with associate problems avoid associates
believing they need a union."
Since the start of the campaign Amazon has softened its approach
by removing a requirement that individual reps send out the firm's
official e-mail response regarding unionisation efforts in response
to enquiries. It has reduced phone shifts over the Christmas period
and introduced free massages.
Employers, unions and financial institutions are keenly watching
the dispute. According to the Prewitt Fund's Duane Stillwell, "We
think it is a unique opportunity to impact working conditions in
the Internet retail economy. And obviously, as Amazon goes, so go
the practices in that industry."
The strength of the response from Amazon has surprised the
unions, which admit their organising drive has not yet been as
successful as expected.
While Amazon's German warehouse workforce established a union in
April this year, there are as yet few signs of moves towards
unionisation in France and Britain.
Nigel Stanley, head of communications for the Trades Union
Congress thinks that may change. He warned dot-coms need to change
their working practices to reflect their growth.
"You can't keep the excitement of a start-up going for years and
years," said Stanley. "And you can't build an economy simply by
employing 25-year-olds and expecting them to burn out by the time
they're 30."
Mike Arrowsmith works for Labour Research Department, an
independent analysts' organisation for trade unions