SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
union busting
A Four-Word Response for Those Upset With Jeff Bezos for Any Number of Reasons: 'Tax the Damn Rich'
Sen. Bernie Sanders noted that the billionaire spent $10 million on the Met Gala, $120 million on a penthouse, and $500 million on a yacht while "planning to throw 600,000 Amazon workers out on the streets and replace them with robots."
May 05, 2026
Amazon founder Jeff Bezos in recent weeks has come under fire for a wide variety of reasons, including his involvement with the 2026 Met Gala and his plans to build a robot workforce.
A Monday report from The Hollywood Reporter noted that Bezos, despite being a lead sponsor of this year's Met Gala, did not make an appearance at the event's red carpet as he had in past years.
Bezos' sponsorship of the Gala has been hit with heavy criticism in recent weeks, as many activists slammed the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art for taking the tech mogul's money despite his company's labor practices and reported involvement in helping US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations.
According to The Hollywood Reporter, other critics "accused the billionaire of buying influence with the major event and speculation swirled that some stars may boycott the event due to his involvement."
In addition to not appearing at the Met Gala red carpet, Bezos is reportedly trying to lower his profile by selling his $500 million luxury yacht.
The New York Post reported on Monday that Bezos has decided that the 417-foot vessel has become "too recognizable," and is also a headache to maintain, costing an estimated $30 million per year to operate.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Tuesday argued that Bezos' lavish spending and his plan to build an army of robots to replace human workers was symbolic of American capitalism in 2026.
"The reality of American life today," Sanders wrote in a social media post. "Jeff Bezos, worth $290 billion, spent: $10 million on the Met Gala, $120 million on a penthouse, $500 million on a yacht. Meanwhile, he‘s planning to throw 600,000 Amazon workers out on the streets and replace them with robots. Unacceptable."
Warren Gunnels, Sanders' staff director, similarly made the case that Bezos' spending spree was yet another argument for raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans.
"Jeff Bezos, who paid $10 million for the Met Gala," Gunnels wrote, "got $62 billion richer since [President Donald] Trump was elected and spent $500 million on a yacht to sail to his $55 million wedding in Venice to give his wife a $5 million ring because his tax rate is less than 1%. Four words: Tax the damn rich."
Labor unions, which have long clashed with Bezos over Amazon's aggressive union-busting tactics, held their own rival "Ball Without Billionaires" on Monday evening to protest the Bezos-funded Met Gala.
As reported by Democracy Now!, the gala featured "Amazon, Whole Foods, Washington Post, Starbucks, and Uber workers" who "walked the runway in looks by immigrant designers."
April Verrett, president of the Service Employees International Union, said the Ball Without Billionaires was "not just about fashion" but "about power" and "telling the truth that people who sew and care and drive and cook and clean and secure and those that create are the ones who make everything possible."
Workers at the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art, who earlier this year voted to unionize, registered their own disapproval of this year's Met Gala, posting a message on Instagram informing followers that "91% of hourly Met staff in our unit earn less than a living wage."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Consumers Looking to Avoid Trump Have One Fewer Option in REI
REI’s leadership has endorsed leaders who gutted public lands, greenwashed their use of AI, deployed a union-busting law firm, and rigged their governance structure to shut out different perspectives.
Apr 26, 2026
In the Trump 2.0 era, many Americans have begun to engage in a new “conscious consumerism”—avoiding the companies that have bent the knee to the president. Data firm Numerator found that 38% of US consumers have participated in some form of a boycott over the last year, and 48% said they would stop buying from a company that had differing political views. Some may have felt that outdoor retailer REI would be an ideal place to shop during this time, a home for like-minded, outdoorsy people who care about the environment.
As an REI worker, I’m still expected to evangelize about REI’s mission—the outdoors, sustainability, and community. But ever since we started unionizing at REI in 2022, it’s now become a facade. REI’s leadership has endorsed leaders who gutted public lands, greenwashed their use of AI, deployed a union-busting law firm, and rigged their governance structure to shut out different perspectives. REI, a favorite of outdoor-loving liberals, has gone Trump.
The first public sign came when REI endorsed the Trump administration directly. The executives of the “co-op,” without any direct feedback from the members whose values and opinions they claim to base their decisions on, signed a letter of support for then-nominee for Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, who ended up being confirmed in a vote of 79-18. In the year since his confirmation, Burgum has spent much of his time opening federal lands up to oil and gas drilling and trying to make the “Gulf of America” name stick. While REI’s new CEO has issued an apology since, the damage is already being done.
But throughout our union effort, from organizing to now bargaining, we’ve seen up close how the co-op has aligned itself with President Donald Trump. REI has met our unionization campaign by hiring a law firm with deep ties to pro-business, anti-worker cases, Morgan Lewis. This firm has been contracted to bust unions in everything from Amazon to professional baseball.
As REI has continued to stonewall us at the bargaining table, it’s opened itself up to a new opportunity for “conscious consumerism.” We have authorized a boycott should the company fail to agree on a contract with its 11 unionized stores.
Its reputation has earned the respect of the Trump administration, as the president installed Crystal Carey, a former partner at Morgan Lewis, as the general counsel for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). In that role, Carey is responsible for setting the agenda for the NLRB as it weighs decisions on union elections, unfair labor practices, and more—including major cases regarding our union campaign. Morgan Lewis also handled the president’s taxes for many years. That’s who REI chose to hire—one of Trump’s favorite law firms.
Perhaps the most damning example of how REI is taking a page from the Trump playbook is how they’ve changed their governance structure. As a co-op, REI members elect the board of directors each year, seemingly a symbol of democratic governance and participation. Any co-op member can vote, and any member can run.
Last year, we decided to nominate two members to the board, Tefere Gebre and Shemona Moreno, longtime labor advocates, outdoor enthusiasts, and progressive leaders. Both were ideal candidates for REI’s board, but instead, their candidacies were rejected outright in favor of a slate of candidates handpicked by REI executives.
In response, we urged co-op members to vote down this slate. They responded overwhelmingly in support—members defeated the slate of candidates, and the board was left with multiple vacancies in response. An expression of will like this—again, from the very members whose values the co-op's executives claim impact their decisions—should have prompted REI to look inward and reflect.
Instead, REI took the Trump route. REI didn’t like the results, so they changed the rules. They moved up the board election to December, after holding it in April and May for years. This came in the middle of negotiations, which prevented us from speaking out against this anti-democratic move. Holding the election over the holidays meant participation would be low, and members couldn’t hear another perspective on any of the co-op’s preferred candidates. It’s a microcosm for how Trump is trying to change the rules of our democracy with the SAVE America Act and gerrymandering.
Of course, REI isn’t alone in cowering to the president. Another major retailer, Target, has also kept its head down during the second Trump administration. The company pulled back its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion initiatives and remained silent as Immigration and Customs Enforcement ran amok in the company’s home state of Minnesota. And Target has paid the price as it has faced boycotts from customers and protests outside its stores.
While many corporations have bowed their heads to the president, it wasn’t always this way. During the first Trump administration, we even had companies like Microsoft, Google, and Facebook speaking out against Trump’s immigration policies.
As REI has continued to stonewall us at the bargaining table, it’s opened itself up to a new opportunity for “conscious consumerism.” We have authorized a boycott should the company fail to agree on a contract with its 11 unionized stores. We do not take this decision lightly, but we know that REI members and customers have our backs in the fight for a fair contract and in the fight against Trump.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Don't Buy Starbucks!' Says Union as It Launches Nationwide Strike Against Coffee Giant’s Unfair Labor Conditions
As its workers fight for a living wage and for the company to address hundreds of labor violation complaints, Starbucks Workers United says it's prepared for the "biggest and longest" strike in the company's history.
Nov 13, 2025
As hundreds of Starbucks workers go on strike across the US to protest the company's unfair labor practices, its union is telling customers to boycott the company in hopes of pressuring it to return to the bargaining table to negotiate its first union contract.
“As of today, Starbucks workers across the country are officially ON STRIKE,” said Starbucks Workers United, the union representing nearly 10,000 baristas, on social media Thursday. “We’re prepared for this to become the biggest and longest [unfair labor practices] strike in Starbucks history.”
The union implored customers: "DON'T BUY STARBUCKS for the duration of our open-ended ULP strike!"
The strike comes after negotiations between the union and the company stalled out in April. Last week, 92% of union baristas voted to authorize a strike as the company's lucrative holiday season began. They are hoping to turn the company’s annual “Red Cup Day,” during which it gives out free reusable cups to customers, into a “Red Cup Rebellion.”
The union says three of its core demands remain unmet. It has called for the company to address "rampant" understaffing, which it says has led to longer wait times for customers and overwhelmed staff, while simultaneously leaving workers without enough hours to afford the cost of living.
It also seeks higher take-home pay for workers. Starting baristas make just over $15 per hour, which data from MIT shows is not enough to afford the cost of living in any US state when working 40 hours a week. According to the union, most Starbucks workers receive fewer than 20 hours of work per week, rendering them ineligible for benefits.
The union has drawn a contrast between its workers' pay, which averages less than $15,000 a year, and that of CEO Brian Niccol, who raked in a total compensation package of $96 million in just four months after taking over last year.
"Too many of us rely on SNAP or Medicaid just to get by, and most baristas still don’t earn a livable wage. In a majority of states, starting pay is just $15.25 an hour—and even then, we’re not getting the 20 hours a week we need to qualify for benefits," said Jasmine Leli, a barista and strike captain from Buffalo, New York, where the first Starbucks store in the nation voted to unionize back in 2021.
The company has gone nearly four years without recognizing it. While it claims to have engaged with the union in "good faith," the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has found Starbucks guilty of over 500 labor law violations, making it the worst violator in modern history.
These have included illegal firings and disciplinary actions against union organizers, the illegal withholding of wages and benefits, threats to close stores that unionize, and illegal surveillance of employees. More than 700 unfair labor practice charges made against the company remain unresolved, including 125 of them filed since January.
According to an estimate from the Strategic Organizing Center, Starbucks' union-busting had cost the company more than $240 million through February 2024. That money was lost in the form of legal fees and payments to consultants, as well as productivity lost due to anti-union store closures and captive audience meetings.
“Things have only gone backwards at Starbucks under Niccol’s leadership," Leli said. "But a fair union contract and the resolution of hundreds of unfair labor practice charges are essential to the company’s turnaround."
The union has argued that in order to meet their demands for a fair contract, it would cost less than a single day's sales.
The strike begins just days after 85 US lawmakers—led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.)—sent letters demanding that the company stop union-busting and negotiate a fair deal with its employees.
"Starbucks is not a poor company," the Senate letter said to Niccol. "Last year, Starbucks made over $3.6 billion in profit and paid out nearly $5 billion in stock buybacks and dividends. In fact, in the first three quarters of the year, Starbucks made $1.7 billion in profit and paid out over $2 billion in dividends. Last year, you made $95 million in compensation for the four months you worked in 2024, roughly 6,666 times more than what your average worker was paid for the entire year."
"Despite that extravagant spending on executives and shareholders, Starbucks refuses to reach an agreement with its own workers even though you are less than one average day’s sales apart from a contract," it continued. "Starbucks must reverse course from its current posture, resolve its existing labor disputes, and bargain a fair contract in good faith with these employees."
The strike will begin at 65 stores across more than 40 US cities, with rallies scheduled in New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, Columbus, and Anaheim, among other locations. The union said the strike is "open-ended," with no set end date, and that baristas across more than 550 unionized stores across the country are prepared to join in.
“If Starbucks keeps stonewalling a fair contract and refusing to end union-busting, they’ll see their business grind to a halt,” said Michelle Eisen, a spokesperson for Starbucks Workers United, who has worked as a barista for 15 years. “'No contract, no coffee' is more than a tagline—it’s a pledge to interrupt Starbucks’ operations and profits until a fair union contract and an end to unfair labor practices are won."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Defending Democracy Starts With Your Phone Plan: Why I Cut Ties With T-Mobile
The most effective way to resist the authoritarian takeover of our democracy is to make it clear to companies partnering with authoritarians that there will always be consequences for such business relationships.
Nov 10, 2025
With everything that the Trump administration is doing to militarize our cities and neighborhoods, it can be easy to forget about all of the damage that Elon Musk has done, and continues to do. He and his Department of Government Efficiency minions destroyed the US Agency for International Development, resulting in incredible misery and thousands of deaths in countries around the world. They fired thousands of dedicated civil servants and embedded themselves in all major government agencies, and combined our personal data in illegal ways that make us all more vulnerable.
While Musk isn’t in the headlines as much now, he continues to use his vast wealth to subvert democracy both here and around the world, and will continue to do so unless we fight back. One of the pillars of his empire is Starlink, which leverages Musk’s relationship with President Donald Trump to help it acquire additional spectrum licenses and crush its competition.
The most effective way to resist the authoritarian takeover of our democracy is to make it clear to companies partnering with authoritarians that there will always be consequences for such business relationships. Earlier this year, T-Mobile became the first major cellular carrier to integrate the Starlink network, positioning T-Mobile customers uniquely to help counter Musk's influence.
I was a T-Mobile customer, starting in 2013. My whole family was on T-Mobile, and I had a business account as well. I develop a mobile application for iPhone and Android, so I needed multiple phone lines for software testing.
If you’re a T-Mobile customer, I strongly encourage you to cancel your T-Mobile contract on the weekend of November 14-16 as thousands join me in boycotting T-Mobile.
After becoming active in the Tesla Takedown campaign, I learned about the dangers posed by T-Mobile's partnership with Starlink. I attended protests at local Starlink offices and wrote directly to T-Mobile's CEO to express my concerns about this collaboration.
T-Mobile's problematic actions extend far beyond this partnership. The company dismantled its diversity, equity, and inclusion program to appease the Trump administration while seeking approval for two major acquisitions. They now host Trump Mobile on their network and lobbied in support of Trump's budget bill—legislation expected to strip millions of Americans of healthcare while delivering tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires. Adding to this troubling record, T-Mobile has spent years employing aggressive union-busting tactics to prevent workers from organizing.
After a month with no reply, I began exploring alternative carriers. It’s important to research that carefully, since other carriers may be owned by T-Mobile directly (like Mint Mobile), or may use the T-Mobile network (like Ultra Mobile and Tello Mobile). To have the greatest impact, it’s best to move to a carrier with no connection to T-Mobile. You can find alternatives here.
After selecting a new carrier, I began moving lines, one by one. I was concerned about how difficult it would be, but it’s surprisingly easy. After moving the last line, the last step was to call T-Mobile and formally terminate my accounts.
Mobile carriers HATE when customers move. It costs money to acquire new subscribers, so they will try very hard to keep you. I explained to the service rep why I was cancelling my contract, and that I had sent a message to the CEO about my concerns. “He’s probably very busy,” the rep said. “Would you wait two more weeks before you cancel?” I explained that I had already waited for a month with no reply. She then offered me a $20 credit for staying. Without being rude, I explained that this wasn’t about money, it was about defending democracy.
If you’re a T-Mobile customer, I strongly encourage you to cancel your T-Mobile contract on the weekend of November 14-16 as thousands join me in boycotting T-Mobile. Even better, you can sign the #BoycottTMobile pledge and actively join us. It’s probably easier than you imagine, and it’s an important step we can take to stop the pipeline that funds Musk and Trump. You’ll be glad you did.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Help Protect Federal Workers From Trump's Union-Busting Attacks
Only months after courting union voters with pro-worker campaign rhetoric, President Trump is on track to become the most anti-union president in modern American history.
Oct 05, 2025
During a 2024 campaign stop in Detroit, President Donald Trump energized the crowd by proclaiming: “I will protect what is ours. I will protect our workers. I will protect our jobs.” Then, asking the audience to look around at empty buildings and remember how they’ve been ripped off, Trump continued, “These pro-worker policies are among the many reasons I’ve been overwhelmingly endorsed by the rank-and-file membership of the Teamsters.”
Only months after courting union voters with pro-worker campaign rhetoric, President Trump is on track to become the most anti-union president in modern American history.
The President’s record is clear: Trump’s first Supreme Court appointee, Neil Gorsuch, cast the deciding vote in Janus v AFSCME, a “right-to-work” ruling Trump praised for allowing workers to opt out of union dues while freeriding off the benefits of collective bargaining provided by dues-paying members. The president’s two labor secretaries, Eugene Scalia and Lori Chavez-DeRemer, have vigorously peeled away protective regulations for workers. And following the unprecedented firing without cause of Gwen Wilcox, a member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the federal agency that addresses unfair labor practices and safeguards workers’ rights remains paralyzed by its inability to reach a quorum.
But what sets President Trump apart is his targeting of public sector unions.
In early April, Representatives Jared Golden (D-Maine) and Ryan Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) introduced bipartisan legislation, “The Protect America’s Workforce Act” (H.R. 2250), to overturn Trump’s executive order and restore all terminated collective bargaining agreements.
During his first term, President Trump issued executive orders targeting federal employee unions, aimed at “weakening their ability to bargain contracts and curtailing the amount of time union representatives can spend helping members with their complaints,” according to Andrea Hsu of NPR’s "Morning Edition." Union officials complained that their ability to file grievances was almost nonexistent.
The president then kicked off his second term with an anti-union executive order, called “Restoring Accountability to Policy-Influencing Positions Within the Federal Workforce,” that allows the reclassification of as many as 10,000 workers, making them at-will employees and stripping union protections. But to this point, no traditional “Schedule F” employees have been reclassified.
Perhaps that’s because President Trump has found an easier path to union busting.
In March, the President cited national security concerns as he directed 22 federal agencies to disregard collective bargaining contracts covering 950,000 federal employees. In late August, he signed a second order “stripping union rights” from 440,000 “employees at six additional agencies,” according to the New York Times. These employees represent the overwhelming majority of unionized federal workers.
Public sector unions have been a bulwark against declining labor power over the past half-century. While private sector unionization has withered to 5.9% (from 35% in the 1950s), unions still represent 32.2% of public employees, according to the latest Bureau of Labor Statistics report. But in only a few months, President Trump has removed union protections from more than a million federal workers, representing over 15% of the 7 million public-sector union members nationwide.
If the president’s moves survive legal challenges, he will be the single biggest union buster in American history, according to data from the Economic Policy Institute.
But there is hope.
In early April, Representatives Jared Golden (D-Maine) and Ryan Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) introduced bipartisan legislation, “The Protect America’s Workforce Act” (H.R. 2250), to overturn Trump’s executive order and restore all terminated collective bargaining agreements. A companion bill that includes a repeal of the most recent executive order has since been introduced in the Senate.
The bill’s authors need 218 signatures to force a vote against the will of House leadership. As of September 17, it has 216 signatures, including 213 Democrats and 3 Republicans, according to the American Federation of Government Employees.
If passed in the House and Senate, the bill becomes law and overrides Trump’s union-busting executive orders, even if the courts uphold them. The president could then sign the bill into law or veto it and send the legislation back to Congress where an override requires a two-thirds majority in each chamber.
In either case, it remains possible to protect the collective bargaining rights of federal employees. So, call your representatives. Flood their inboxes. Let them know that we intend to stand up for our federal civil servants.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Boycott T-Mobile—and All Trump Collaborators
Let's make it clear not just to T-Mobile but all of corporate America: There are costs to siding with this authoritarian government.
Oct 03, 2025
Ever since the Irish Land League organized community members in County Mayo to band together and refuse to serve, work for, trade with, or even deliver mail to the English land agent, Captain Charles Boycott, the boycott has become a staple in activists’ toolkit. And nearly 160 years since Captain Boycott was effectively ostracized—as US President Donald Trump and his cronies assail American democracy and send troops into our cities and masked goons onto our streets—it's a tool that’s gaining a renewed prominence once again.
After Target dropped its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) targets in February, Black faith leaders, including Pastor Jamal Bryant, called for a boycott of the company. “What we learned from the Montgomery bus boycott is that racist America doesn’t respond to speeches, it responds to dollars,” Pastor Bryant told his parishioners at his 10,000-member megachurch in Atlanta.
In the months that followed, Target’s sales, foot traffic, and stock price tanked. By August, Forbes was announcing that the boycott had cost the Target CEO his job and the company’s investors $12 billion.
After Elon Musk started his attempts to destroy the US government earlier this year, including bragging about putting USAID into the woodchipper, an act that may have killed half-a-million people so far, thousands committed to boycotting Tesla as part of the #TeslaTakedown movement.
If a company like T-Mobile believes that there are no economic consequences to siding with authoritarianism, they are much more likely to do it.
In the midst of the boycott, Tesla sales collapsed, the stock price cratered, and before long Musk was out of the government and engaging in a very public bitching session about President Trump.More recently, after Disney suspended Jimmy Kimmel for comments following the tragic murder of Charlie Kirk, a boycott of Disney grew so rapidly, with tens of thousands of cancellations of Disney, Hulu, and ESPN, that it forced the company into reinstating the comedian.
Attempting to build on this, the labor union, the Communication Workers of America, the Tesla Takedown campaign, and the climate coalition I held lead, Stop the Money Pipeline, have launched the T-Mobile Boycott.
In the fight to save democracy, T-Mobile has chosen the wrong side: It’s hosting Trump Mobile on its network, despite the conflicts of interest being so great they may amount to corruption. T-Mobile is also partnering with Elon Musk’s Starlink, pouring billions into the far-right extremist’s pockets, and it lobbied in favor of Trump’s deadly budget bill, which will strip healthcare from millions of Americans. T-Mobile has also engaged in years of union busting so vicious it recently became the first telecommunications company to be added to the AFL-CIO’s boycott list.
We’ve set a goal of 10,000 T-Mobile customers canceling their contracts between November 14-16. In the process, we hope to build on the energy of the Target, Tesla, and Disney boycotts and make it clear not just to T-Mobile but all of corporate America: There are costs to siding with this authoritarian government.
If you’re a T-Mobile customer, you can take the pledge to hang up on T-Mobile here.
Even if you’re not a customer, we encourage you to take the pledge to boycott T-Mobile. The boycott is happening right before the holiday season, when a lot of people switch carriers—tens of thousands of people pledging to never switch to T-Mobile at this time of year is an important part of the campaign.
But I also want to be honest with you, I don’t know if this campaign will work. While we’re urging people to cancel en masse next month, I recently completed a test run and canceled my contract with T-Mobile and switched to Visible (saving more than $60 on my monthly cell phone bill in the process).
As economically advantageous as it was however, it took me about 45 minutes to switch from T-Mobile, including a call to the company to get a “port out pin.” In the grand scheme of things, 45 minutes isn’t an eternity, but it’s also not nothing. It took me less than four minutes to cancel my Disney+ subscription after Kimmel’s suspension.
I have no idea if we can get 10,000 people to do something that might take them nearly 45 minutes, even if we can convince them it is a small but important act in the fight to save democracy.
But I do know this, in On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the 20th Century, Timothy Snyder’s first lesson was, “Do not obey in advance.” And not only is T-Mobile obeying in advance, it's actively courting the administration, even as the horrors pile up: the attacks on free speech, the naked threats against political opponents, the vanishing of countless human beings into a gulag in El Salvador.
So, in this time of grave peril for this country and the world, let us use our money to build the world we want to see.
From Target to Tesla to T-Mobile, let us boycott the collaborators.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Teamsters Rally in NYC After Amazon's 'Illegal' Firing of 150 Unionized Drivers
"Amazon would be nothing without its workers," said one worker. "We're the ones who power their profits. We're the ones who put our health and safety on the line every single day."
Sep 09, 2025
Teamsters and their supporters rallied outside a New York Amazon facility Monday in protest of what they said was an "illegal" firing of over 150 unionized drivers.
According to the union, the fired workers were employed by the delivery service provider Cornucopia, one of thousands of providers the company contracts with to deliver packages. These workers joined the Teamsters last year as the union went on strike in nine cities across the US.
Amazon claims these workers are not employees, but "contractors," and that firing them does not constitute illegal union busting.
The union, however, described this as "a phony shell game," saying that the contractors "wear Amazon uniforms, follow Amazon rules, and work off Amazon's routing software."
"Amazon calls the shots," read a statement from the union. "They are the employer and everyone knows it."
Last year, a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) official in Los Angeles agreed that the company had engaged in unfair labor practices when it fired other unionized contractors in California, and determined that they did, in fact, count as employees of Amazon.
At the time, this ruling seemed to provide some clarity as Amazon workers fought to have their union recognized by the company, which has refused to recognize them for years.
This remained the case even after 2024, when more than 10,000 Amazon workers joined the Teamsters and the union launched the largest strike ever against the company right before the holidays, during which they demanded the company negotiate a fair contract that included wage increases and addressed workplace safety issues and illegal union busting.
Outside Amazon's DBK4 facility, which joined the strike last year, the Teamsters and their allies renewed calls for negotiation Monday.
"Amazon is breaking the law and we let the public know it," said Antonio Rosario, a Local 804 member and Teamster organizer.
Latrice Shadae Johnson, a Teamster who works at DBK4, added that "Amazon would be nothing without its workers."
"We're the ones who power their profits. We're the ones who put our health and safety on the line every single day. We're the ones who made them a $2 trillion corporation," said Johnson. "If Amazon thinks we're going to take this lying down, they have another thing coming. Our solidarity is only growing stronger."
That solidarity has come from many corners across New York City, with members of the City Central Labor Council, part of the AFL-CIO, taking part in the rally.
The Teamsters were also joined by democratic socialist state Sen. Kristen Gonzalez (D-59), who defeated the industry-backed cousin of former Queens US Rep. Joe Crowley in 2022.
"I've been in office three years, and every single year I've been right here in this spot because every single year Amazon has done union-busting," Gonzalez said to cheers from the crowd, "It's because they think they are above the law."
In 2024, Amazon joined a lawsuit filed by Elon Musk's company SpaceX, arguing that the NLRB, which is responsible for adjudicating labor rights violations, is unconstitutional because its members cannot be fired at will by the US President.
Just one week into his term, President Donald Trump fired NLRB member Gwynne Wilcox, effectively crippling the board's ability to rule on union-busting cases.
According to LaborLab, which publishes reports on corporate union busting, "Without a functioning board, companies like Amazon and Tesla can engage in union-busting tactics with impunity, facing no legal consequences for violating workers' rights."
The progressive state assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, currently the frontrunner to be New York City's next mayor, brought national attention to the Teamsters' plight on Monday.
"One of the most powerful corporations in the history of the world is firing unionized drivers in Queens," Mamdani wrote on X. "Solidarity with the Teamsters who rallied today against these unjust layoffs and to demand good faith negotiations."
Several Democratic members of the House of Representatives from New York, including Jerry Nadler and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, issued their own statements of solidarity, as did Republican Mike Lawler.
"Any company that denies workers the right to choose [collective] bargaining rights, including Amazon, should be confronted," Lawler said. "Unions are the backbone of this country. They helped build this country. And they damn well will ensure we have a strong and secure country moving forward."
Nadler added that he stood "with Amazon Teamsters as they rally in Queens today to hold Amazon accountable for its unlawful anti-union activity."
"Amazon," he said, "stop union busting and start bargaining a fair contract now!"
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The System is Rigged': CEOs Made 285 Times More Than Their Workers in 2024: AFL-CIO Report
The CEO of Starbucks made 6,666 times as much as the company's median employee, all while the company crushes workers' efforts to unionize.
Jul 24, 2025
The staggering inequality between bosses and workers only continued to grow last year, according to a new report from the AFL-CIO on executive pay.
The union's latest "Executive Paywatch" report, which uses data from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to track the pay disparities between CEOs and the employees that work for them, found that the average S&P 500 executive made an eye-popping 285 times more than their median worker did, up from a 268-to-1 ratio in 2023.
CEOs received a $1.4 million raise last year, the data shows, bringing their average yearly compensation up to $18.9 million, a 7% increase. The median worker, meanwhile, made just $49,500, marking just a 3% increase from the year before.
In order to make the same amount as their boss made in a single year, the report noted that the typical employee would need to have begun working in 1740—"Before the AMERICAN REVOLUTION," the union noted on X.
By far the widest disparity was at Starbucks, where CEO Brian Niccol—who took over the company last year—brought home 6,666 times as much as his median employee.
In 2024, while the average Starbucks employee took home less than $15,000, Niccol received a compensation package, primarily made up of company stock, worth nearly $98 million.
For more than three years, Starbucks has waged what New York Times columnist Megan Stack called a "dirty war" against its employees' attempts to unionize.
The company has fired union organizers and pro-union workers, cut their hours to deny them healthcare coverage, shut down unionized stores, and subjected employees to aggressive anti-union "captive audience" meetings.
The Economic Policy Institute estimates that Starbucks has likely had more complaints of illegal union-busting filed against it than any other company in the National Labor Relations Board's 90-year history.
In response to the AFL-CIO's new report, the X account for Starbucks Workers United wrote: "When Starbucks and CEO Brian Niccol tries to tell us they can't afford fair union contracts... remember this."
Starbucks is merely the most glaring example of the inequality highlighted in the report: Coca-Cola, General Electric, Ross Stores, Yum! Brands, Chipotle, and many other flagship American companies paid their CEOs more than 1,000 times as much as their median workers.
These disparities are projected to get even larger following the passage of President Donald Trump's recent budget legislation, which guts social safety net programs like Medicaid and food stamps in order to pay for gigantic new tax breaks for corporations and the wealthiest Americans.
It has been described by some economic analysts as the "largest transfer of wealth in history."
According to a study by the University of Pennsylvania, the incomes of the top 0.1% wealthiest households will increase by more than $83,000 on average by 2033, while the incomes of the poorest 40% will decline.
"Corporate CEOs are raking in millions, and now they'll get another kickback from President Trump's tax cut gift and anti-worker agenda," said Fred Redmond, secretary-treasurer of the AFL-CIO.
The average marginal tax rate paid by these executives, the report found, will decrease by nearly $500,000 a year. In all, the CEOs in the report will be able to avoid paying an extra $738 million in income taxes thanks to the bill.
That lost tax revenue, the report found, could have paid for Medicaid healthcare coverage for more than 80,000 people, SNAP food assistance for over 300,000, or school lunches for more than 900,000 students.
The report notes that many of the CEOs and companies that are expected to profit royally from the bill gave large donations to Trump's inauguration, including Amazon's Jeff Bezos, Coinbase's Brian Armstrong, Google's Sundar Pichai, and Meta's Mark Zuckerberg.
"Is it any wonder," asked former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, "so many people think the system is rigged?"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Lawsuit Says Union-Busting Trump Order Is 'Unconstitutional' Attack on Working Class
One union leader called President Donald Trump's executive order "the most significant assault on collective bargaining rights we have ever seen in the United States."
Apr 04, 2025
A coalition of labor unions representing federal workers across the United States sued the Trump administration on Friday over its recent order aimed at stripping union rights from more than a million government employees, a move that the lawsuit characterizes as a blatant violation of the First Amendment.
The suit, brought by unions that collectively represent more than 950,000 federal workers, stems from a March 27 order titled "Exclusions From Federal Labor-Management Relations Programs," in which President Donald Trump cites a provision of a 1978 law to deny collective bargaining rights to certain government workers on national security grounds.
But the unions behind the new lawsuit say the national security justification is a smokescreen to hide the true intent of the order: further eroding workers' organizing rights.
"Federal employees have had the right to join a union and bargain collectively for decades—through multiple wars, international conflicts, and a global health emergency during President Trump's first term," said Everett Kelley, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees. "During all that time, they served the American people with honor and distinction. No one, including President Trump, ever suggested unions were a national security concern."
"Trump's newest order to revoke union rights is a clear case of retaliation," he added. "But I've got news for him: We are not going anywhere."
The lawsuit points specifically to language included in a fact sheet the White House released in conjunction with Trump's March 27 order. The document claims that "certain federal unions have declared war on President Trump's agenda," citing AFGE lawsuits against the administration and legal actions by Veterans Affairs unions.
Shortly after Trump signed the order last week, the administration sued AFGE and many of its local affiliates in federal court in an attempt to cancel dozens of collective bargaining agreements between unions and federal agencies. Reuters noted that the administration claimed the union contracts are impeding "Trump's abilities to purge the federal workforce and protect national security."
"The labor movement stands in solidarity, and we will not let this administration's union-busting tactics silence us."
The unions' new lawsuit states that the "avowedly retaliatory nature" of Trump's executive order and its "attempt to punish federal unions who engage in politically disfavored speech and petitioning activities and decline to 'work with' the president renders it unconstitutional under the First Amendment."
The lawsuit also notes that billionaire Elon Musk, the richest person in the world and a top Trump lieutenant, has used his social media platform to promote a recent post that attacked several federal workers' unions by name.
"The president's unlawful executive order attacking federal unions is not only an attack on a million federal workers but is a direct attack on all workers who seek a collective voice to bargain for a better future," April Verrett, president of the Service Employees International Union, said in a statement Friday. "This is blatant retaliation against brave workers who dared to exercise their First Amendment rights to criticize this administration's authoritarian overreach. The labor movement stands in solidarity, and we will not let this administration’s union-busting tactics silence us."
Randy Erwin, president of the National Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE), called Trump's order "the most significant assault on collective bargaining rights we have ever seen in the United States" and said it is "clear that this executive order is retaliation for federal unions fighting back against the Trump administration's attempts to dismantle the civil service."
"This is yet another direct attack by the President not only on federal employees, but also veterans, working families, and the very fabric of our democracy," said Erwin. "However, federal workers' collective bargaining rights are protected by law and President Trump does not have the right to unilaterally eliminate them. NFFE and our allies are confident the rule of law will be upheld, and the critical rights of working people will be protected."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Starbucks Strike Expands to 300+ US Stores as Workers Demand a Just Contract
"Workers shouldn't struggle to pay their bills while working for one of the biggest fast-food corporations in the world," said Starbucks Workers United.
Dec 24, 2024
Starbucks workers at more than 300 locations across the United States, from Atlanta to Boston to Los Angeles, are expected to walk off the job Tuesday to pressure the coffee giant to come to the bargaining table with a just contract offer that includes a living wage, benefit improvements, and fair scheduling.
As the Christmas Eve strikes kicked off, Starbucks Workers United (SBWU) wrote in a social media post that management's latest economic offer to unionized workers, which included no immediate wage increases, indicated that the $100 billion corporation "seems to prefer investing in CEO Brian Niccol's $113 million compensation package."
"SBWU is demanding the company present us with a serious economic offer at the bargaining table," the group wrote. "Workers shouldn't struggle to pay their bills while working for one of the biggest fast-food corporations in the world."
"If Starbucks wants to put their money where their mouth is," SBWU added, "it's time to invest in WORKERS the way they're investing in rich CEOs. We demand Starbucks bargain a fair contract!"
Over 5,000 Starbucks workers have walked off the job so far as part of the latest strikes, according to one organizer.
Starbucks employees and supporters rally outside of a Starbucks store on December 23, 2024 in New York City. (Photo: Adam Gray/Getty Images)
Since the groundbreaking victory in Buffalo, New York just over three years ago, the Starbucks union movement has expanded to more than 500 stores across the U.S., with over 11,000 baristas organizing in the face of aggressive and often illegal opposition from the company's management.
Unionized Starbucks workers are demanding a base wage of at least $20 an hour for baristas, with an elevated wage floor in high-cost-of-living areas and annual inflation adjustments.
They're also calling for healthcare benefit improvements, protections against union-busting, and "a fair process to obtain consistent schedules."
SBWU said Tuesday that the Christmas Eve walkouts mark the largest-ever unfair labor practice strike at Starbucks, and the organization urged customers and allies to boycott the company for the duration of the actions.
"Spread the word—and friends don't let friends cross the picket line!" SBWU wrote on social media.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy