🧑⚖️ REGULATION

Union Do-Over

2022 saw two very different outcomes for unionization efforts at Amazon warehouses. In Staten Island, 5,500 Amazon workers voted to join their own union (the Amazon Labor Union). Meanwhile, in Bessemer, Alabama, warehouse employees there tried twice to join a union but failed both times. Pro-union voices argued that Amazon used illegal tactics like mandatory anti-union meetings to break the efforts, and now the National Labor Relations Board is weighing in.

“Ensuring that workers can make a truly free choice about whether they want union representation is one of the fundamental goals of the National Labor Relations Act,” Lauren McFerran, Chair of the NLRB said in a statement, reports Bloomberg. “Captive audience meetings—which give employers near-unfettered freedom to force their message about unionization on workers under threat of discipline or discharge—undermine this important goal.”

The agency's decision against captive audience meetings overturns a 76-year-old ruling by the agency (Babcock v Wilcox Co.) which permits such meetings. As Bloomberg adds, "mandatory anti-union gatherings interfere with workers’ organizing rights because they coercively demonstrate employers’ economic power by requiring attendance on pain of discipline or discharge, the NLRB said."

But not everyone on the NLRB board agrees with the decision. Board Member Marvin Kaplan has argued that prohibiting captive audience meetings effectively denies a corporation its First Amendment right to free speech. “Here, the conflict between the majority’s prohibition of captive-audience speeches and the Constitution is manifest and irreconcilable,” he said.

Meanwhile, Amazon is suing the NLRB over claims that the agency is wielding powers unconstitutionally, and has stated that it will appeal this latest ruling on mandatory meetings.

“Meetings like this are held by many companies because the decision about whether or not to join a union is an important one, and employees deserve to understand the facts so they can make an informed choice,” a spokesperson for Amazon said in a statement.

Recognition

While the warehouse in Alabama tries again at unionizing, the Staten Island employees have been having their own challenges even after a successful unionization. As NPR reports, "for two years now, Amazon has refused to recognize the upstart union or begin bargaining with some 5,500 workers it represents in Staten Island, N.Y. The company continues to legally challenge the union's victory, while the union's finances and internal cohesion have deteriorated."

To stay afloat, the ALU is partnering with the Teamsters for both financial and organizational support. "The Teamsters and ALU will fight fearlessly to ensure Amazon workers secure the good jobs and safe working conditions they deserve in a union contract," Sean O’Brien, president of Teamsters, said in a statement.

Verdict

The NLRB finds itself in a precarious situation during this lame-duck period between the election and inauguration. While its decision to overturn Babcock v Wilcox Co is major, the incoming administration may reverse course entirely.

📱 TECH

Meta Monopoly

The Biden Administration may be in its waning days, but its crusade against Big Tech monopolies isn't slowing down.

This week, a judge in Washington ruled that Meta must face trial over an FTC lawsuit charging the social media behemoth with attempting to crush emerging competition by acquiring WhatsApp and Instagram. "Meta, then known as Facebook, overpaid for Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014 to eliminate nascent threats instead of competing on its own in the mobile ecosystem," the FTC alleges, reports Reuters.

Meta tried to dismiss the suit back in 2020 (during the Trump Administration), but District Court Chief Judge James Boasberg largely denied the motion by agreeing that Meta acted illegally.

“In the end, while the parties’ legal jousting is both impressive and comprehensive, it leaves no clear victor. This case must go to trial. Under the forgiving summary-judgment standard, the FTC has put forward evidence sufficient for a reasonable factfinder to rule in its favor,” Boasberg wrote in a 92-page opinion, notes The Hill.

For its part, Meta remains “confident that the evidence at trial will show that the acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp have been good for competition and consumers,” says a statement by the tech titan. “More than 10 years after the FTC reviewed and cleared these deals, and despite the overwhelming evidence that our services compete with YouTube, TikTok, X, Apple’s iMessage, and many others, the Commission is wrongly continuing to assert that no deal is ever truly final, and businesses can be punished for innovating.”

But the FTC sees its case as representing "a bipartisan effort to curtail Meta’s monopoly power and restore competition to ensure freedom and innovation in the social media ecosystem,” commission spokesperson Doug Farrar said, notes Law.com.

Monopoly Cases

Beyond Meta's case, where do the remaining FTC monopoly cases currently stand?

An inventory by the New York Times catalogs them:

A case against Amazon by the FTC and 17 states for "squeezing sellers" on its marketplace to create "artificially higher prices” goes to trial in October 2026.

A suit by the DOJ and 15 states against Apple charges the iPhone maker with market manipulation in the smartphone sector. The Cupertino-based hardware giant has filed to dismiss the case.

A federal judge ruled recently against Google for holding a monopoly in online search. The judge's decision on how to penalize the company is still pending.

Verdict

What makes this case so interesting is that it’s effectively a bipartisan case. It was started under the Trump administration’s DOJ, mostly hung in limbo during the Biden years, and now may continue under a renewed Trump term. Of course, Trump’s position on Silicon Valley has changed drastically in the intervening 4 years.