Connect with us

Published

on

Workers picket in front of an Amazon Logistic Station on December 19, 2024 in Skokie Illinois.

Scott Olson | Getty Images

Italo Medelius-Marsano was a law student at North Carolina Central University in 2022, when he took a job at an Amazon warehouse near the city of Raleigh to earn some extra cash.

The past month has been unlike any other during his three-year tenure at the company. Now, when he shows up for his shift at the shipping dock, Medelius-Marsano says he’s met with flyers and mounted TVs urging him to “vote no,” as well as QR codes on workstations that lead to an anti-union website. During meetings, managers discourage unionization.

The facility in the suburb of Garner, North Carolina, employs roughly 4,700 workers and is the site of Amazon’s latest labor showdown. Workers at the site are voting this week on whether to join Carolina Amazonians United for Solidarity (CAUSE), a grassroots union made up of current and former employees.

CAUSE organizers started the group in 2022 in an effort to boost wages and improve working conditions. Voting at the site, known as RDU1, wraps up on Saturday.

Workers at RDU1 and other facilities told CNBC that Amazon is increasingly using digital tools to deter employees from unionizing. That includes messaging through the company’s app and workstation computers. There’s also automated software and handheld package scanners used to track employee performance inside the warehouse, so the company knows when staffers are working or doing something else.

“You cannot get away from the anti-union propaganda or being surveilled, because when you walk into work they have cameras all over the building,” said Medelius-Marsano, who is an organizer with CAUSE. “You can’t get into work without scanning a badge or logging into a machine. That’s how they track you.”

CAUSE representatives have also made their pitch to RDU1 employees. The union has set up a “CAUSE HQ” tent across the street from the warehouse and disbursed leaflets in the facility’s break room.

I'd buy Amazon over Meta, says Hightower's Stephanie Link

Amazon, the nation’s second-largest private employer, has long sought to keep unions out of its ranks. The strategy succeeded in the U.S. until 2022, when workers at a Staten Island warehouse voted to join the Amazon Labor Union. Last month, workers at a Whole Foods store in Philadelphia voted to join the United Food and Commercial Workers union.

In December, Amazon delivery and warehouse workers at nine facilities went on strike, organized by the Teamsters, during the height of the holiday shopping season to push the company to the bargaining table. The strike ended on Christmas Eve.

Union elections at other Amazon warehouses in New York have finished in defeat in recent years, while the results of a union drive at an Alabama facility are being contested. Organizers have pointed to Amazon’s near-constant monitoring of employees as both a catalyst and a deterrent of union campaigns.

The NLRB has 343 open or settled unfair labor practice charges filed with the agency against Amazon, its subsidiaries and contracted delivery companies in the U.S., a spokesperson said. 

Amazon has argued in legal filings that the NLRB, which issues complaints against companies or unions determined to have violated labor law, is unconstitutional. Elon Musk’s SpaceX, Starbucks and Trader Joe’s have also made similar claims that challenge the agency’s authority.

Amazon spokeswoman Eileen Hards said the company’s employees can choose whether or not to join a union.

“We believe that both decisions should be equally protected which is why we talk openly, candidly and respectfully about these topics, actively sharing facts with employees so they can use that information to make an informed decision,” Hards said in a statement.

Hards said the company doesn’t retaliate against employees for union activities, and called claims that its employee monitoring discourages them from unionizing “odd.”

“The site is operating, so employees are still expected to perform their usual work,” Hards said in a statement. “Further, the camera technology in our facilities isn’t to surveil employees — it’s to help guide the flow of goods through the facilities and ensure security and safety of both employees and inventory.”

Orin Starn, a CAUSE organizer who was fired by Amazon early last year for violating the company’s drug and alcohol policy, called Amazon’s employee tracking “algorithmic management of labor.” Starn is an anthropology professor at Duke University who began working undercover at RDU1 in 2023 to conduct research for a book on Amazon.

“Where 100 years ago in a factory you would’ve had a supervisor come around to tell you if you’re slacking off, now in a modern warehouse like Amazon, you’re tracked digitally through a scanner,” Starn said.

‘Just the algorithm’

John Logan, a professor and director of labor and employment studies at San Francisco State University, told CNBC in an email that Amazon has “perfected the weaponization” of technology, workplace surveillance and algorithmic management during anti-union campaigns “more than any other company.”

While Amazon may be more sophisticated than others, “the use of data analytics is becoming far more common in anti-union campaigns across the country,” Logan said. He added that it’sextremely common” for companies to try to improve working conditions or sweeten employee perks during a union drive.

Other academics are paying equally close attention to the issue. In a research paper published last week, Northwestern University PhD candidate Teke Wiggin explored Amazon’s use of algorithms and digital devices at the company’s BHM1 warehouse in Bessemer, Alabama.

“The black box and lack of accountability that comes with algorithmic management makes it harder for a worker or activist to decide if they’re being retaliated against,” Wiggin said in an interview. “Maybe their schedule changes a little bit, work feels harder than it used to, the employer can say that has nothing to do with us, that’s just the algorithm. But we have no idea if the algorithm has changed.”

People protest in support of the unionizing efforts of the Alabama Amazon workers, in Los Angeles, California, March 22, 2021.

Lucy Nicholson | Reuters

Some Amazon employees see the situation differently. Storm Smith works at RDU1 as a process assistant, which involves monitoring worker productivity and safety. Amazon referred Smith to CNBC in the course of reporting this story.

Amazon’s workplace controls, like rate and time off task, are “part of the job,” Smith said. Staffers are “always welcome” to ask her what their rate is, she added.

“For my people, if I see your rate is not where it’s supposed to be, I’ll come up to you and say, ‘Hey, this is your rate, are you feeling alright? Is there anything I could get you to get your rate up? Like a snack, a drink, whatever,” Smith said.

Wiggin interviewed 42 BHM1 employees following the first election in 2021, and reviewed NLRB records of hearings. The facility employed more than 5,800 workers at the time of the union drive.

The NLRB last November ordered a third union vote to be held at BHM1 after finding Amazon improperly interfered in two previous elections. The company has denied wrongdoing.

Amazon staffers told Wiggin that during the union campaign, the company tweaked some performance expectations to “improve working conditions” and dissuade them from unionizing. One employee said these changes were partly why he voted against the union, according to the study.

Workers at an Amazon warehouse outside St. Louis, Missouri, filed an NLRB complaint in May. The employees accused Amazon of using “intrusive algorithms” that track when they’re working to discourage them from organizing, The Guardian reported. The employees withdrew their complaint on Tuesday.

Hards said Amazon doesn’t require employees to meet specific productivity speeds or targets.

Lawmakers zeroed in on how surveillance can impact organizing efforts in recent years. In 2022, the former NLRB general counsel issued a memo calling for the group to address corporate use of “omnipresent surveillance and other algorithmic-management tools” to disrupt organizing efforts. The following year, the Biden Administration put out a request for information on automated worker surveillance and management, noting that the systems can pose risks to employees, including “their rights to form or join a labor union.”

However, the Trump administration is attempting to purge the NLRB, with the president firing the chair of the organization on his first day in office last month. Trump has put Musk, a notorious opponent of unions, in charge of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, with the goal of cutting government costs and slashing regulations.

Fired by an app

Jennifer Bates, an Amazon.com, Inc. fulfillment center employee, stands for a portrait at the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union (RWDSU) office in Birmingham, Alabama on March 26, 2021. 

Patrick T. Fallon | AFP | Getty Images

The Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, which sought to represent BHM1 workers, has said the AtoZ app can access a user’s GPS, photos, camera, microphone and WiFi-connection information. The union also claims that “Amazon can sell the data collected to any third party companies and that data cannot be deleted.” The technology raises several concerns, including that it may suppress “the right to organize,” RWDSU said.

Hards said the RWDSU’s claims are inaccurate and denied that the company sells any data affiliated with AtoZ use. She said AtoZ users must give the app permission to access things like their GPS location.

At the Garner facility, the AtoZ app has been plastered with “anti-union propaganda” since the RDU1 election was announced last month, Medelius-Marsano said.

One AtoZ message suggested employees’ benefits could be at risk if they voted in a union, while another described CAUSE as an “outside party” that’s “claiming to be a union.”

RDU1 site leader Kristen Tettemer said in another message that a group like CAUSE “can get in the way of how we work together,” and that “once in, a union is very difficult to remove.” Smith said Amazon’s response to the union drive has been centered around “putting out the facts and telling you to do your research.”

Medelius-Marsano said it all amounts to an environment of intimidation.

“There’s no doubt about it,” Medelius-Marsano said. “If we lose, fear is going to be the reason.”

WATCH: How Musk’s businesses may benefit from Trump’s presidency

How SpaceX, Tesla, xAI and X may benefit from Elon Musk's position as head of government efficiency

Continue Reading

Technology

Google and Disney reach deal to restore ESPN, ABC to YouTube TV

Published

on

By

Google and Disney reach deal to restore ESPN, ABC to YouTube TV

Alphabet and Disney on Friday announced that they’ve reached a deal to restore content from ABC and ESPN onto Google’s YouTube TV.

The deal comes after a two-week standoff between the two companies that started on Oct. 31. The stalemate resulted in numerous live sporting events, including college football games and two Monday Night Football games, being absent from the popular streaming service.

“We’re happy to share that we’ve reached an agreement with Disney that preserves the value of our service for our subscribers and future flexibility in our offers,” YouTube said in a statement. “Subscribers should see channels including ABC, ESPN and FX returning to their service over the course of the day, as well as any recordings that were previously in their Library. We apologize for the disruption and appreciate our subscribers’ patience as we negotiated on their behalf.”

Disney Entertainment’s co-chairs Alan Bergman and Dana Walden, along with ESPN Chairman Jimmy Pitaro, said in a statement that said the agreement reflects “how audiences choose to watch” entertainment.

“We are pleased that our networks have been restored in time for fans to enjoy the many great programming options this weekend, including college football,” they said.

More than 20 Disney-owned channels were removed from YouTube TV, which offered its subscribers $20 credits this week due to the dispute. In addition to ABC and ESPN, other networks that were unavailable included FX, NatGeo, Disney Channel and Freeform. 

The main sticking point between the two companies was the rate Disney charges YouTube TV for its networks. Disney’s most valuable channel, ESPN, charges carriage of more than $10 a month per pay-TV subscriber, a higher fee than any other network in the U.S., CNBC previously reported.

It’s not the first conflict this year between YouTube and legacy media.

NBCUniversal content was nearly removed from YouTube TV before the companies reached an agreement in October, preventing shows like “Sunday Night Football” and “America’s Got Talent” from being pulled.

YouTube TV also found itself in a standoff with Fox in August that almost resulted in Fox News, Fox Sports and other Fox channels going dark on the service just before the start of the college football season. The two sides were able to strike a deal to prevent a blackout.

YouTube said it has the option for future program packages with Disney and other partners.

Disney said that access to a selection of live and on-demand programming from ESPN Unlimited, which includes content from ESPN+ and new content on its all-inclusive digital service coming later this year, will be available on YouTube TV to base plan subscribers at no additional cost by the end of 2026.

Here’s the memo that Disney executives sent to employees:

Team,

We’re pleased to share that we’ve reached a new agreement with YouTube TV, and all of our stations and networks are in the process of being restored to the service.

While this was a challenging moment, it ultimately led to a strong outcome for both consumers and for our company, with a deal that recognizes the tremendous value of the high-quality entertainment, sports, and news that fans have come to expect from Disney.

Over the past few years, we’ve led the way in creating innovative deals with key partners –
each one unique, and each designed to recognize the full value of our programming. This new agreement reflects that same creativity and commitment to doing what’s best for both our audiences and our business.

We’re proud of the work that went into this deal and grateful to everyone who helped make it happen — especially Sean Breen, Jimmy Zasowski, and the Platform Distribution team for their tireless commitment throughout this process.

Thank you all for your patience and professionalism over the past several weeks. As you all know, the media landscape continues to evolve quickly, which makes these types of negotiations complex. What hasn’t changed is our focus on the viewer. Our priority is — and will always be — delivering the best experiences and the best value to fans, and we’ll continue working closely with our partners to ensure we’re fulfilling that mission for our audiences.

We’re incredibly optimistic about what’s ahead and grateful to all of you for continuing to set the standard for entertainment around the world.

Alan, Dana & Jimmy

Disclosure: Comcast is the parent company of NBCUniversal, which owns CNBC. Versant would become the new parent company of CNBC upon Comcast’s planned spinoff of Versant.

WATCH: Google has a lot more leverage over Disney in their carriage fight: LightShed’s Rich Greenfield

Continue Reading

Technology

We’re looking to further trim this drug stock and exit this entertainment giant

Published

on

By

We're looking to further trim this drug stock and exit this entertainment giant

Continue Reading

Technology

JPMorgan Chase wins fight with fintech firms over fees to access customer data

Published

on

By

JPMorgan Chase wins fight with fintech firms over fees to access customer data

An exterior view of the new JPMorgan Chase global headquarters building at 270 Park Avenue on Nov. 13, 2025 in New York City.

Angela Weiss | AFP | Getty Images

JPMorgan Chase has secured deals ensuring it will get paid by the fintech firms responsible for nearly all the data requests made by third-party apps connected to customer bank accounts, CNBC has learned.

The bank has signed updated contracts with fintech middlemen that make up more than 95% of the data pulls on its systems, including Plaid, Yodlee, Morningstar and Akoya, according to JPMorgan spokesman Drew Pusateri.

“We’ve come to agreements that will make the open banking ecosystem safer and more sustainable and allow customers to continue reliably and securely accessing their favorite financial products,” Pusateri said in a statement. “The free market worked.”

The milestone is the latest twist in a long-running dispute between traditional banks and the fintech industry over access to customer accounts. For years, middlemen like Plaid paid nothing to tap bank systems when a customer wanted to use a fintech app like Robinhood to draw funds or check balances.

That dynamic appeared to be enshrined in law in late 2024 when the Biden-era Consumer Financial Protection Bureau finalized what is known as the “open-banking rule” requiring banks to share customer data with other financial firms at no cost.

But banks sued to prevent the CFPB rule from taking hold and seemed to gain the upper hand in May after the Trump administration asked a federal court to vacate the rule.

Soon after, JPMorgan — the largest U.S. bank by assets, deposits and branches — reportedly told the middlemen that it would start charging what amounts to hundreds of millions of dollars for access to its customer data.

In response, fintech, crypto and venture capital executives argued that the bank was engaging in “anti-competitive, rent-seeking behavior” that would hurt innovation and consumers’ ability to use popular apps.

After weeks of negotiations between JPMorgan and the middlemen, the bank agreed to lower pricing than it originally proposed, while the fintech middlemen won concessions regarding the servicing of data requests, according to people with knowledge of the talks.

Fintech firms preferred the certainty of locking in data-sharing rates because it is unclear whether the current CFPB, which is in the process of revising the open-banking rule, will favor banks or fintechs, according to a venture capital investor who asked for anonymity to discuss his portfolio companies.

The bank and the fintech firms declined to disclose details about their contracts, including how much the middlemen agreed to pay and how long the deals were in force.

Wider impact

The deals mark a shift in the power dynamic between banks, middlemen and the fintech apps that are increasingly threatening incumbents. More banks are likely to begin charging fintechs for access to their systems, according to industry observers.  

“JPMorgan tends to be a trendsetter. They’re sort of the leader of the pack, so it’s fair to expect that the rest of the major banks will follow,” said Brian Shearer, director of competition and regulatory policy at the Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator.

Shearer, who worked at the CFPB under former director Rohit Chopra, said he was worried that the development would create a barrier of entry to nascent startups and ultimately result in higher costs for consumers.

Source: Robinhood

Proponents of the 2024 CFPB rule said it gave consumers control over their financial data and encouraged competition and innovation. Banks including JPMorgan said it exposed them to fraud and unfairly saddled them with the rising costs of maintaining systems increasingly tapped by the middlemen and their clients.  

When Plaid’s deal with JPMorgan was announced in September, the companies issued a dual press release emphasizing the continuity it provided for customers.

But the industry group that Plaid is a part of has harshly criticized the development, signaling that while JPMorgan has won a decisive battle, the ongoing skirmish may yet play out in courts and in the public.

“Introducing prohibitive tolls is anti-competitive, anti-innovation, and flies in the face of the plain reading of the law,” said Penny Lee, CEO of the Financial Technology Association, told CNBC in response to the JPMorgan milestone.

These agreements are not the free market at work, but rather big banks using their market position to capitalize on regulatory uncertainty,” Lee said. “We urge the Trump Administration to uphold the law by maintaining the existing prohibition on data access fees.”

Continue Reading

Trending