SPRING 2025
ISSUE 02
SDR Amazon: A Crack in the Colossus
XABIER IRASTORZA, MANU ROBLES-ARANGIZ FUNDAZIOA OF ELA UNION
TRANSLATED FROM SPANISH BY NATE EDENHOFER
1 Translator’s note: ingresos complementarios, as a concept, covers a range of different extras and benefits – transport stipend, extra hours, and bonuses. It can mean any income that is not a part of the salary or contract and that the employer can take away.
2 From the original: “In September 2018, Amazon opened its first temporary distribution center in the Basque Country, in the town of Lezama. Ten months later, it launched the 8,000 m² warehouse in Trapagarán. It opened another 22,000m² logistics center in Oiartzun in November 2020. It also has a 5,000m² center in the Vitoria industrial park in Júndiz. Recently, several media outlets have reported that Amazon, continuing its expansion strategy, has acquired a 200,000m² plot in Araba, although details remain undisclosed at the time of writing.”
3 Translator’s note: this refers to the historical relation between the unions and the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (FMLN) guerrillas, predominantly in the 1980s. There have been no active guerillas in El Salvador since the 1992 peace accords when the FMLN demobilized and became a political party. Members or leaders of unions may still be or have been ex-guerillas or FMLN supporters
4 Translator’s note: A union section is a voluntary formation of delegates and members of a given union. The size of union sections varies from company to company. Ten members are required to constitute a section and elections are held later, and then every few years to determine the relative strength of all unions present in the workplace. Representatives are selected to sit on a standing bargaining committee based on the vote.
5 Translator’s note: In Spain, collective bargaining agreements function at multiple levels: Estate, regional, provincial and company or workplace agreement. Gipuzkoa is one of four provinces in South Basque Country (in Spanish State). There are also different sectoral agreements. The employer will always try to apply the cheapest agreement possible. In the context of this quotation, Efrain didn’t know which agreement, if any, was being applied in his case.
6 Translator’s note: As in other EU countries, the works council is a broader representative body of workers at both the enterprise and industrial or sectoral level. If a union is also present in the workplace, union representatives typically predominate in the works council.
7 Translator’s note: The ERE is a mechanism for collective dismissal in Spain requiring the company to consult with workers’ representatives and state authorities.
8 Translator’s note: State agreements are typically worse for workers than provincial agreements in the Basque Country.
9 Josefina L. Martínez, Amazon desde dentro: el secreto está en la explotación [(Revista Contexto SL, 2024).
10 Translator’s note: In union elections, a unit of 63 workers elects five delegates, requiring at least five candidates. The 21 candidates for ELA far surpasses this requirement and shows the support of workers for the union.
The following text is a translation of a report from November 2024 on the struggles of workers at an Amazon subcontractor, “Smart Delivery Routes” (SDR), in the Basque Country. It tells the story, largely through the reflections of workers and unionists, of the formation of a union with Basque Workers Solidarity [Euskal Langileen Alkartasuna (ELA)], their fight to impose the working standards of the province (far more worker friendly than state regulations) on the employer, and their strike against company closure and layoffs. It culminates in a significant legal victory, requiring that workers be retained even when Amazon transfers its contract from one subcontractor to another. This ruling permits workers to maintain the wages and conditions they won under a different shell company. At the behemoth Amazon, even small wins prove that further inroads can be made, but this was no small victory.
As the conclusion makes clear, this is a moment of intensive struggle against the corporate giant, continuing apace even in the short time since the publication of this report. Issue 2 (Spring 2025) of Long-Haul carries an extensive interview with Amazon workers based in New York about their organizing and strikes, most notably in December 2024. Recent events in Quebec, meanwhile, highlight the lengths Amazon will take in its counteroffensive against unionization. The multinational character of Amazon obliges its workers to seek out and learn from their coworkers in other countries, and we are proud to contribute modestly to this essential transmission.
The translation omits certain passages and sections from the original and contains additional information on the strike. LH
WHEN THE SITUATION BECOMES UNTENABLE
NEREA: We couldn’t take it anymore. We faced more and more pressure, more penalties, less pay… A significant part of our income came in the form of bonuses [ingresos complementarios]. Whenever it suited them, they punished us and took away these extras.1
EFRAÍN: I have had a good personal relationship with the person in charge. For a while, I felt comfortable and rewarded at work. But as time passed, I felt used. The workload increased, but the salary got smaller and smaller. In fact, through the bonus system, they took 100, 150, or 200 euros off your salary for things like a small scratch on the van, not meeting objectives, or any other excuse, whether what they said was true or not.
JOSÉ ANTONIO: Workloads never stop going up, they never go down, but salaries stay the same. We end up exploding.
This is how workers of Smart Delivery Routes (SDR), an Amazon subcontractor in the distribution center in Oiartzun, explained what caused the situation to explode.2
Workers arrived at SDR in different circumstances. Some had started at a previous Amazon subcontractor, NR Courier, and moved to SDR when Amazon terminated the contract. Others went to work at SDR directly.
Despite having the same job and performing the same tasks, these workers had different workloads and received different salaries. According to one employee, who has had coordination responsibilities for delivery routes, some drivers went out with 200 packages and others with 120. Alongside the penalties doled out for arbitrary reasons – reducing salaries, giving worse routes, or reducing working hours – discrimination was flagrant.
It is common for two, three, or even four subcontracted companies to hold different contracts with Amazon at the same distribution center, each with different levels of dependency on Amazon and different working conditions. Companies operate variously under a Delivery Service Partner (DSP) 2.0 or DSP 1.0 contract – recognizable by whether they use vans with the Amazon logo and color scheme or white vans without insignia.
Another worker, who has held various positions of responsibility with different Amazon subcontractors for years, says that every time Amazon moves from one subcontractor to another, the rhythms and working conditions inevitably change:
MIKEL: When a new company arrives, it charges less and is given lighter workloads. But after a while, the workloads increase, while the company tries to keep the salaries low.
A similar situation occurs during peak seasons:
NEREA: During Christmas, special holidays, or peak sales periods, workloads increase a lot, but salaries remain the same.
The situation at SDR was rapidly deteriorating and the company was aware. The worker with coordination responsibilities, quoted above, summarized the situation as follows:
MIKEL: I saw how those poor people came every day – anguished, exhausted, complaining, burned out. The company realized what was happening – that the people were at the limits of their strength. But instead of correcting the situation, management begged and asked for favors: “Come tomorrow, please, I need you.” This may be acceptable on occasion or in a specific situation, but when that becomes the norm and workers are constantly sacrificing, you burn out and say: “Enough!”
THE NEED FOR HELP AND ORGANIZATION
EFRAÍN: The situation was very bad, so I decided to go to the union. At first, I was afraid of unions. Where I come from, El Salvador, the word “union” is associated with guerrillas.3 I didn’t have any contact with the unions there; they even scared me a bit. Now I had to decide which union to go to, but nine out of ten people told me, without hesitation, to go to ELA [Eusko Langileen Alkartasuna or Basque Workers’ Solidarity].
So I made an appointment and showed up with a dozen questions. I wasn’t intending to hold elections or establish a union section, but when I was talking to José Vidal [head of ELA’s organizing department], I realized that we were even worse off than I thought.4 José helped me see that the company was exploiting us, deceiving us, and did not respect our rights. I left the ELA headquarters much angrier than I entered. I began to see what was happening in a different way, that the situation could change, that we needed tools… I left with the conviction that we had to do something.
Efraín spoke first with the people he trusted most, and then relayed what José had said. He also reached out to the coordinator for SDR’s Gipuzkoa [region of Basque Country] branch, because he trusted her. She basically agreed with Efraín and even joined the union. But under pressure from her superiors, she tried to stop him and delay the decisions. She tried to convince him to make contact with other unions, but Efraín’s response was firm: “We have been standing and waiting for too long, it’s time to do something!”
Although this was Efraín’s first contact with the union, some of his colleagues had previous experience with seeking help with problems in the workplace. For instance, while at the previous subcontractor, Nerea had made several attempts, ultimately unsuccessful, to organize her colleagues. When Efraín approached her, she didn’t hesitate: “Me too. I’m going with you!”
THE IMPORTANCE OF UNION AFFILIATION FOR BUILDING A COLLECTIVE
When Efraín first approached the ELA headquarters, none of the 60 people on the company’s staff were affiliated with any union.
EFRAÍN: José made me see that it was important to feel part of a collective and to build it. It was essential to explain the situation to our colleagues, make them see that the situation can change, and that we can organize ourselves to act. He gave me the membership forms and I spoke one by one with each compañero and compañera.
JOSÉ ANTONIO: Everyone was fed up with the situation, but we needed someone to light the fuse. When Efraín came, many joined the fight.
SERGIO: Many workers joined. Efraín convinced us of the importance of unionizing and organizing collectively – that this was the only way to change the situation, defend our rights, and improve our working conditions, that the union was the instrument we needed to get what we wanted.
I never thought we would get so far. Now, when I see the new conditions at work, what the current collective agreement is, and when I compare it with what we had before, I realize what we have done.
GET REPRESENTATION, STRENGTHEN THE ORGANIZATION, BUILD BARGAINING POWER
Before Efraín went to speak with José Vidal for the first time, head of ELA’s organizing department, he had no thought of holding union elections or establishing a union section.
EFRAÍN: José explained the importance of holding union elections and having representation to be able to negotiate anything with the company. I didn’t know what that meant, but everything José said, and the way in which he said it, gave me so much confidence that I followed his advice to the letter.
When we started talking about electing union delegates, I went to Nerea. I wasn’t entirely sure, but I knew how she thought and that she wanted to move forward. She was also in contact with many other workers. She and I gathered several people we trusted and formed the first list.
When we started these movements, the company also began to show its hand. They tried to prevent the election, and, when that failed, to delay it. Finally, they put the United Services Organization (USO) – a yellow union – forward as a candidate for the elections.
A mere six months after Efraín’s first visit to the ELA headquarters, with summer vacation in between, elections were run, and all five ELA delegates won contested races.
The committee was thus formed, the union section was organized, and responsibilities were distributed among its members.
Although Efrain first made contact with ELA and took the initial organizing steps, he soon became aware of Nerea’s leadership qualities.
EFRAÍN: At first, after talking to José, I started telling everyone I could find to join the union. But when it came time to hold elections and create a work team, I turned to Nerea.
MIKEL: At first, there was distance and distrust between the workers who came from NR Courier [a previous Amazon subcontractor], those who were from SDR, and those who had just joined. […] It is a very isolating job. You barely have time to talk with coworkers. Nerea’s position of responsibility in SDR meant that there was some initial mistrust towards her. But the organizing campaign has helped us get to know each other better and unite.
SERGIO: To form the candidacy slate [candidatura] and work team, Efraín and I spoke a lot. Initially, we had doubts about Nerea. She had an important position, and although she supported us, we were not sure we could trust her. Efraín was clearer about it: he had confidence in her and she immediately showed that she is a principled, loyal person. She also had a good relationship with the entire staff and put in a lot of work.
EFRAÍN: Nerea has been key. Due to her work responsibilities, she had relationships with all the delivery men and women. This has been crucial for reaching and organizing everyone – for generating trust and forming the group – in a job in which we barely see each other. That work has been carried out mainly by her. I didn’t have the kind of relationship with the rest of the staff that she had. For me, it has been a great reference. At first I didn’t know her well and I had a point of distrust towards her, but today I can say that she is my friend. Nerea assumed the role of leader and has always been there, in good times and bad.
NEREA: I was also a delivery driver and I knew what they were suffering. It was clear to me that we had to organize ourselves and do something. Due to my responsibilities and, perhaps also because of my way of being, I interact with everyone and most of the time I have good and close relationships. It was easy for me to discuss problems and work with people on what we could do. Efraín and the rest couldn’t be with everyone, due to their schedule and type of work, but I could.
Once the union section was formed, the workers had regular meetings with José Vidal and began planning next steps. They quickly built significant membership and the necessary representation to negotiate with management, as well as solid organization and leadership. But what to negotiate for? What should the main demands be? What objectives should they pursue? And what steps should they take to achieve them?
THE TERRITORIAL AGREEMENT OF GIPUZKOA AS AN OBJECTIVE
EFRAÍN: The first time I met with José, I didn’t know that we could request the application of an existing agreement. I went there with all my questions written down and when I asked him what rights we had, he answered that he didn’t know.
He asked me, “What is the agreement that applies to you?” I didn’t even know what he was talking about. Then he said, “If you don’t know the agreement that applies to you, you can’t know what your rights are.”5
SDR has its headquarters in Andalusia [an autonomous community in Southern Spain] and takes the established working and salary conditions there as a reference. Sergio, one of the elected delegates, explained that a salary of €1,200 in Andalusia is not the same as in Euskal Herria (Basque Country). As noted above, this means that various subcontractors in the same Amazon delivery center fall under different contracts. Therefore, workloads, routes, penalties, salaries, and working conditions generally differ from worker to worker.
MIKEL: Some workers at Amazon do the same job as me – we have the same functions, same responsibilities, use the same applications and computers, the same network for Amazon warehouses – but they earn €10,000 more per year than me.
When Efraín first went to ELA, no one knew which, or even whether, any collective bargaining agreements applied at SDR.
SERGIO: It was José who explained that we should take the Gipuzkoa [region of the Basque Country] road freight transport collective agreement as a reference. Our conditions and the terms of the Gipuzkoa territorial agreement were very far apart, but José was clear that it should be our reference. We took his advice.
NEREA: Understanding our situation, establishing the reference agreement and negotiation strategy. . . we owe it all to José. Without him, we could not have taken the steps we did.
SERGIO: They applied the category of delivery person [repartidor] to us, but it didn’t correspond to the job we performed. The salary was much lower. . . Then José told us: “No, the category that corresponds to you is driver-deliveryman [conductor-repartidor].” This category receives a much higher salary.
Once the strategy became clear, leaders discussed with coworkers what the application of the Gipuzkoa agreement could mean. They held several assemblies and created a WhatsApp group to facilitate communication between the driving group and the staff. Once the plan was agreed on, it was time to negotiate.
“TOO EASY” – THE FIRST NEGOTIATION
The workers approached the negotiating table with SDR with a definite strategy: to insist that the relevant agreement was road freight transport in Gipuzkoa [transporte de mercancías por carretera de Gipuzkoa], and that it was not presently being honored.
EFRAÍN: The human resources managers from Andalusia came to the first meeting. José handled the meeting very well. Two, three, four times he asked them: “The agreement applies to the staff of this company, does it not?” The company was forced to agree. Then he asked: “And the agreement that applies to them will be that for the road freight transport in Gipuzkoa, right?” The company agreed and this was recorded in the minutes. This step was key to focus negotiations on the implementation of the agreement. José could then ask: “Why then is it not being applied?”
From there, everything was easy – too easy.
NEREA: We barely had to negotiate anything. We put our demands on the table and, surprisingly, the company said yes to everything: “Yes, yes, yes. We will change it.”
The application of the Gipuzkoa road freight transport agreement represented a notable improvement. It included:
• Salary increases greater than 36 percent.
• Specified shift start and end times. (Previously, paid working time would only start once the route and packages were given and would be extended as necessary. In some cases, if there was no work or the workload was lighter, they would reduce hours and salaries were reduced in proportion.)
• Full-time contracts and contributions. (Previously, the company only recognized 95 percent of the workers’ time, claiming that they worked “only” 38 hours a week and did not take into account the annual calculation of hours.)
• Defined calendar and planned on-call shifts with defined rotation and an additional €200 per month for this extra availability. (Previously, workers were required to be available without compensation when not called upon.)
• Holiday rates of 175 percent. (Previously, workers received no extra pay on Sundays and only an additional €50 on public holidays.)
• Full pay from the first day of sick leave.
SDR was the only Amazon subcontractor brought under any territorial agreement for the transport of goods by road. The precedent established here was therefore very important.
If the negotiation was relatively simple, the effective implementation of the territorial agreement cost them more.
SERGIO: We had to fight for the application of the agreement. The months after coming to the agreement were hard, until they saw that we would not give up. We were very strong and willing to do anything.
NEREA: We also filed a complaint with the Labor and Social Security Inspectorate [ITSS] for non-compliance with the agreement. I think that also forced the company to comply with the territorial agreement.
Eight months after Efraín went to the ELA headquarters for the first time and met with José Vidal, and just two months after the union elections, it seemed that they had achieved an agreement that substantially improved their working conditions without any genuine conflict.
The protagonists, however, have different views about the meaning of the ease and speed with which the process developed.
SERGIO: It seems to me that Amazon had made the decision to close SDR. Therefore, it was willing to accept everything requested, without any hassle. I thought it would immediately close the company and get rid of the problem.
NEREA: I believe that SDR did not want problems and that is why they quickly reached the agreement. They have seven sites in Spain, six in Andalusia, and one in the Basque Country. They have total control over the six Andalusian sites and I believe that they absolutely did not want trouble, even less in the Basque Country.
JOSÉ ANTONIO: Perhaps they thought that after reaching the agreement with us, they could go to Amazon and say, “We have an agreement with the union, so we need a contract of greater economic value to comply with the new conditions.” And when they saw that Amazon was unwilling to improve their terms, the arrangement wasn’t profitable and so they decided to close the company.
MIKEL: I believe that Amazon did not want trouble or for the issue to have a wider impact. They don’t want negative publicity. They’ve already had several conflicts that received media coverage. In Spain and elsewhere in Europe, the Amazon Flex program had to be closed because the courts condemned the company for using thousands of false freelancers [falso autonomo]. If things went wrong or there was a conflict, they didn’t want to see Amazon’s name tarnished.
AMAZON TAKES ACTION: COMPANY CLOSURE AND LAYOFFS
Two months after the agreement, on April 23, 2023, SDR informed the works council of its intention to close its site in Gipuzkoa and dismiss all 61 people who worked there.6 The SDR workers have no doubt that Amazon was behind this decision.
NEREA: When negotiations began, an Amazon representative suddenly showed up to gather information about what we were doing at our center.
MIKEL: Someone in a role that previously didn’t exist at the company came to the delivery center with a manager who, one month earlier, was working for another company, to see how “staff morale” was. I’ve worked in other Amazon plants and have never seen anything like this, nor any person dedicated to that task.
Amazon has staunch anti-union policies and takes great measures to prevent the organization of workers and to counteract the influence of unions. The workers interviewed have no doubt that this led to SDR’s closure.
NEREA: I believe that Amazon did not get involved until quite late in the process. It seems to me that at first Amazon did not give much heed to what was happening and told SDR, “Fix your own problems. Control your staff.” And when Amazon saw what we accomplished and imagined what it could mean elsewhere, they said, “It’s over!”
MIKEL: They are used to having absolute control over subcontractors and it seems to me that our movement threatens that power. That is why they intervened. Decisions were no longer made solely according to Amazon’s directives, but the union committee also weighs in, setting conditions and contesting the absolute power that Amazon desires.
Amazon tolerates no challenges to its power. This is why it opposes unions in its subcontractors and why it attacks workers or unions that are beginning to organize. It is Amazon’s modus operandi. As soon as it sees that a company or workplace begins to unionize, it shuts things down. Companies within their logistics centers that are forced to close are then awarded contracts elsewhere: “Close here and I will give you work in other centers and other routes.” They give more and better contracts to companies that are loyal to them.
INDEFINITE STRIKE, TRIAL, AND UNPRECEDENTED VICTORY
In response, workers held an assembly, with large participation, in which the following decisions were adopted:
• Refuse to sign or agree to the Expediente de Regulación de Trabajo (ERE).7
• Demand that Amazon assume responsibility for all workers hired by SDR, who exclusively work for Amazon.
• Begin an indefinite strike on May 23, 2023, to win back pay owed from the non-application of the Gipuzkoa road freight transport agreement and, especially, to defend the jobs under threat.
While the ERE negotiations were unfolding, Amazon subcontracted the responsibilities of SDR to another company, DELCOM Delivery, which was already carrying out training courses with prospective employees.
JOSÉ VIDAL: During the strike, we staged different protests and social events. We interrupted the departure of packages from Amazon’s logistics center in Oiartzun until the Ertzaintza (Basque Police) arrived and we had to suspend the action. We also protested in the training courses for new DELCOM hires who were intended to replace the SDR staff.
The strike was called off after only three days because of its limited effects on SDR. Amazon began carrying out deliveries through DELCOM and transferred other aspects of SDR’s operations to another subcontractor (ALPHA NORTH), which had a comparable workforce to SDR.
JOSÉ VIDAL: The relationship between SDR workers throughout the conflict, and in particular during the days of the strike, was very good. We only had four people we couldn’t convince to join the fight. For various reasons, they became strikebreakers. But the core of the workforce remained cohesive. This was no simple achievement, considering that the people involved were from different places and countries.
Relationships with workers of the subcontractor, ALPHA NORTH, were more complicated. The majority were interested and receptive to the struggle of the SDR workers. But others did Amazon’s dirty work, especially on days when the vans were blocked from leaving the logistics centre.
In short, these few days on strike were very intense. We shared experiences with people, many of them with no union experience and facing significant obstacles due to language and migration status. We had younger workers who had to cover basic needs, whether they wanted to or not, and who were heavily dependent on their salary. Despite this, they knew to hold on, even giving ELA the necessary confidence to take this issue to the end. Something that at first seemed very difficult to achieve.
ELA requested the presence of Amazon throughout the lay-off process, as well as all documentation related to the relationship between SDR and Amazon, which neither company was inclined to provide. In fact, this documentation showed that SDR was a contrived subcontractor of Amazon – that Amazon completely controlled and organized SDR’s operations. (This was later confirmed by a court ruling.)
Meanwhile, ELA petitioned the Department of Labor of the Basque Government to investigate Amazon’s subcontracting network. ELA was certain that SDR was a fraudulent subcontracting structure – due to the degree of exploitation and job insecurity – designed to circumvent basic rights and legislation.
NEREA: Amazon was willing to pay large compensation to dismissed workers. Their desire was to get rid of the problem. Pay whatever compensation was necessary in order to defuse the conflict.
The Department of Labor didn’t do its job, but ELA prepared thoroughly for the trial. Together, SDR workers and ELA leadership collated information and documentation, which proved decisive in the trial.
Amaia Iturrieta, the ELA lawyer responsible for the case, claims that the ruling advances the fight against Amazon’s fraudulent subcontracting networks, as well as those of other transnational companies.
SERGIO: I think it is the first ruling with content like this… It seems to me that we are still not aware of the full meaning of what we have achieved and the consequences it may yet have.
CONCLUSION
Difficult and important fights are being waged against Amazon in many places, and workers have already made inroads. We see this in the 2018 strikes to maintain the workplace agreement in San Fernando de Henares (Spain); the global #MakeAmazonPay actions in 2021 in over 20 countries, including trucker strikes in Italy and warehouse strikes in France; or the mobilizations and strikes carried out during the days of Black Friday and Cyber Monday; the formation of the first union in Staten Island (USA) in 2022; the multiple protests in Bad Hersfeld, Graben, and Leipzig (Germany); and the blockades at the Coventry (England) warehouse in 2023. In the Basque Country, workers have initiated demonstrations, protests, and strikes in the logistics center of Trapagarán (Bizkaia) and within the subcontractors that operate there, aiming to end precarity, improve working conditions, guarantee labor rights, and win an agreement.
These mobilizations and strikes have undoubtedly empowered and organized workers, although their achievements have been relatively limited. In Coventry, workers increased their salary from £10.5 an hour to £13 – they demanded £15 – but the attempt to establish a union did not succeed. In San Fernando de Henares, despite intense mobilizations, workers were unable to defend the previous [provincial] worksite agreement, nor the working conditions included in it, and instead they are subject to the state courier agreement.8 In Germany, as a result of the strikes, Amazon raised wages to €14 per hour (two euros above the German minimum wage), increased pay on Christmas, improved overtime pay, and refurbished break rooms. However, Amazon has refused to sign collective agreements with the Ver.di union. In Trapagarán, workers won salary increases and improvements in the organization of shifts, while commitments to increase occupational health and safety measures have also been achieved. But it has not been possible to apply its own agreements at the worksite level, nor those in the Basque Country.
As these mobilizations and strikes have minimally improved wages and other conditions, Amazon’s anti-union policies have intensified in step. To avoid the impact of strikes, the company has reallocated goods to other delivery centers and tried to replace striking workers with pseudo self-employed workers. Amazon has fought off the most important demands and the most profound changes, thus limiting the effectiveness and achievements of these struggles.
Even so, what the workers achieved in SDR should not be understated. In addition to fostering solid organization and building the experience of struggle, they targeted the very structure and organization of Amazon. Their struggle opens the possibility of challenging the company’s network of subcontractors, which has allowed it to sidestep responsibilities and exploit workers to maximize profits.
JOSÉ ANTONIO: We have defeated a giant. When I received the news in our WhatsApp group that we had won the trial, I started jumping and shouting, “Yes, yes, yes! We have won! We have won!” My partner told me, “What are you doing? Are you crazy?”
MIKEL: Amazon’s entire organization is based on false subcontractors and false freelancers and the court ruling highlights all this.
Josefina L. Martínez describes in her book several strategies that Amazon uses to maximize productivity and maintain control, including subcontracting and the use of self-employed workers.9
The company uses small subcontractors and freelancers as part of its business model, particularly in the “last mile” phase of delivery. Subcontractors maintain the formal appearance of independent companies but are, in reality, completely dependent on Amazon for their operation. This system allows Amazon to benefit from the work of employees who are not formally on its payroll. Subcontractors assume the costs, management of the workers, and the risks and responsibility, but Amazon maintains control over its operations. This court ruling and the victory achieved by the SDR workers and ELA opens a gap to combat this network of subcontractors, and by extension, Amazon itself.
Although this victory owed much to the extraordinary work of the ELA Legal Services and the Insolvency and Layoffs team, it would have been impossible without the initiative and involvement of the SDR workers, the participation of those within the ELA, or the capacity and strength that the strike fund affords. In this and the struggles to come, all these ingredients will be essential.
Congratulations to the SDR workers who have led this fight; to Nerea, Efraín, José Antonio, Sergio and Mikel who formed the committee and participated in the interviews to make this publication possible; to José Luis Vidal, María Uria and Amaia Iturrieta, integral members of ELA who have offered essential support, and to the militancy of ELA that make supporting this type of struggle possible.
When trust and organizational work challenge the “Amazon model”
JOSÉ LUIS VIDAL RIVAS, HEAD OF THE SECRETARIAT
OF THE ELA’S ZERBITZUAK FEDERATION (PRIVATE
SERVICES FEDERATION OF ELA) IN THE OARSO-BIDASOA REGION
The “Amazon model” of business – “buy what you want, at any time” – in addition to being ecologically unsustainable, runs on exploitation and precarious work.
The majority of workers in SDR fulfilled the archetype, from the employer’s perspective, of an “exploitable worker” – migrants with few economic resources, considered “low-skilled.” without job stability, and very vulnerable. These are people condemned to miserable working conditions and salaries due to the application of the State Courier Agreement, which guarantees only the minimum wage and fails to protect against endless working days, irregular work calendars, and constant availability.
I remember that, for a time, various workers approached ELA intermittently, with basic problems and questions from the workplace. The key was to find people who had the capacity to collectivize the problems and organize with their colleagues.
Trust is a fundamental factor. In this company, people don’t know each other. Distrust and competition are the norm. What I exchange with senior representatives of the company and what they discuss with the rest of the staff, therefore, becomes critical.
The workers at SDR were extremely thorough, meeting with everyone on the job and earning their trust and affinity, eventually achieving the support of the whole collective. As an example, of the 63 registered workers, 21 ran as ELA candidates in the union election.10
Once the workers established the Company Committee, the goal was clear: The application of the Gipuzkoa road freight transport agreement. Their achievement directly challenges Amazon’s business model. The company was quick to react.
But what these workers accomplished has great value. The court ruling, which requires Amazon to keep the same workers even if they end the contract with SDR and use a different subcontractor, is the icing on the cake.
A pioneering ruling in the fight against new methods of exploitation
AMAIA ITURRIETA IRIBARREN, ATTORNEY AND MEMBER
OF THE ELA LEGAL SERVICES AND ITS INSOLVENCY
AND LAYOFFS TEAMS
This is a pioneering ruling against Amazon’s system of exploitation and its network of subcontractors, which allows it to violate the rights of workers, the law, and applicable bargaining agreements.
Illegal subcontracting of workers. The ruling clearly establishes that Smart Delivery Routes was illegally subcontracting workers. The ruling, I would say, may have implications for nearly every one of Amazon’s subcontractors, and possibly even those of companies that adopt similar business models.
During the trial, thanks to the amount of information and documentation we managed to compile, we demonstrated that the subcontractor worked exclusively for Amazon, operated within Amazon’s organizational orbit, and that it effectively is Amazon, through its computer system that sets the routes, times, systems, and delivery schedules, and identifies the merchandise. Through an app used by each worker, Amazon controls the entire transportation process and monitors their activity throughout the day. The subcontractor not only uses Amazon’s resources, but the latter designs and manages the labor process and communicates directly with workers to direct their tasks.
The subcontractor, for its part, does not organize the work and is limited to personnel management. Even this role is limited, as Amazon controls hiring, training, clothing, and disciplinary action, including the power to fire. Amazon, through its applications, organizes the work. Without Amazon’s tools, the activity could not be carried out.
Void dismissal. Due to the illegal subcontracting of workers, the ruling establishes that the layoff order processed by Smart Delivery Routes is null and void. It was carried out by an entity, SDR, that is not the only legitimate employer, meaning that Amazon should have participated if it were to be valid. This, however, would have reinforced the fact that the initial subcontracting of workers was illegal.
Violation of the right to freedom of association and guarantee of indemnity. The dismissals occurred directly after workers reached a more beneficial agreement. This demonstrates that the company’s objective, in dismissing the entire staff and closing the Gipuzkoa site, was to avoid implementing the new terms of the agreement. In short, the ruling found a violation of the fundamental right to freedom of association, since the exercise of this right must not cause harm to workers.
Readmission and maintenance of the workforce. The annulment of the dismissal gives workers the right to opt for reinstatement under the same conditions. Because of the termination of SDR and its direct replacement by Amazon with the subcontracted firm, DELCOM Delivery, the ruling compels this new company to maintain the workers under the same conditions as before.
BREAKING NEWS! ELA WINS A COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE DELIVERY SUBCONTRACTORS BESAIDE LOGISTICS AND SONIC DELIVERY
After we had finished writing, we learned that ELA reached a new agreement with Amazon to maintain jobs in the event that it terminates its contract with two subcontracted companies.
With full representation in the companies subcontracted by Amazon Besaide Logistics and Sonic Delivery, ELA achieved a collective agreement that substantially improves the working conditions that until now were regulated by the State Courier Agreement. Under the agreement, 70 workers at the subcontractors, Ezkerraldea and Gasteiz, will receive salary increases of 31 percent over a three-year period. Both companies will pay an increase of around 25 percent for 2024, an additional 3 percent for 2025, and a further 3.1 percent for 2026. (Previously, they were receiving minimum wage salaries.) The new framework also includes benefits such as seniority, provisions for temporary disabilities, and other bonuses related to the provision of the service. The new collective agreement also provides for a 36-hour work week, down from 38 hours under state regulation.
In this way, ELA has punctured a hole for the first time in Amazon’s hiring model, with an agreement that commits the multinational corporation to guarantee the employment of workers in the face of changes in subcontracted companies. In the past, every time Amazon terminated a contract with a company, the workers lost their jobs, as in the case of Vayven Delivery in Ezkerraldea. Now, the 70 workers at Besaide Logistics and Sonic Delivery do not have to worry about the hiring decisions made by the tech giant. If the subcontracted company changes, the staff must become part of the new contractor, maintaining their previous conditions.
This victory shows that advances are the result of an organized and unionized workforce willing to fight precarity. Through the organization of workers and a strong union, it is possible to improve living conditions even within digital capitalism. ELA considers these agreements a very significant reference for employment around digital platforms, and will continue working to improve conditions on platforms such as Uber and Glovo.
