Amazon Defeats Second Staten Island Union Vote at LDJ5 Facility 618 to 380

On May 2, 2022, workers at Amazon’s LDJ5 sorting facility on Staten Island voted 618 to 380 against joining the Amazon Labor Union (ALU), delivering a significant defeat to the upstart union just one month after its historic victory at the nearby JFK8 fulfillment center. The loss at the smaller facility—with only 38% of votes in favor compared to 55% at JFK8—demonstrated that the ALU’s breakthrough success was not easily replicable and revealed challenges the nascent union faced in expanding beyond its initial victory. The defeat stemmed from multiple factors: LDJ5’s workforce was overwhelmingly part-time (approximately 80%) rather than full-time, giving workers less investment in workplace conditions; the ALU had focused most resources on the JFK8 campaign and had less time to build relationships at LDJ5; and Amazon refined its anti-union tactics after the JFK8 loss, including intensified captive-audience meetings and more sophisticated messaging targeting the specific concerns of LDJ5’s part-time workforce.

The LDJ5 Facility and Its Workforce

LDJ5 is a sorting center where packages from larger fulfillment centers like JFK8 are organized for local delivery. The facility is significantly smaller than JFK8, with approximately 1,600 eligible voters compared to JFK8’s 8,325. Critically, the workforce composition differed dramatically:

Part-Time Workforce: According to ALU organizers and workers at the facility, approximately 80% of LDJ5 workers were part-time, working shifts of only a few hours rather than full 8-10 hour days. This part-time composition created distinct challenges:

• Lower Stakes: Part-time workers often had other jobs or were students, making Amazon employment less central to their economic security and reducing motivation to organize for improvements
• Less Time at Facility: Shorter shifts meant less opportunity for workers to build relationships with coworkers or connect with union organizers
• Different Concerns: Part-time workers’ grievances centered less on grueling full-shift quotas and more on scheduling flexibility and hours availability
• Higher Turnover: Part-time positions typically experience higher turnover, making sustained organizing more difficult

Different Work Conditions: Sorting center work, while still physically demanding, was perceived as somewhat less brutal than the picking and packing work at fulfillment centers like JFK8. The slightly different conditions meant grievances that motivated JFK8 workers didn’t translate as directly to LDJ5.

The Vote Count and Margin

The NLRB conducted vote counting on May 2, 2022, with the following results:

• Against union: 618 votes (61.9%)
• For union: 380 votes (38.1%)
• Total votes cast: 998 (approximately 62% turnout)
• Eligible voters: Approximately 1,600

The 238-vote margin against the union was decisive—even if all challenged ballots had been counted for the union, the outcome would not have changed. The 38% support level was significantly lower than the 55% the ALU received at JFK8 just one month earlier.

Why the ALU Lost at LDJ5

The defeat resulted from multiple factors that distinguished LDJ5 from JFK8:

1. Resource and Attention Constraints The ALU had focused enormous effort on the JFK8 campaign for nearly two years, building deep relationships with workers and developing sophisticated organizing strategies. By contrast, the LDJ5 campaign was compressed into a shorter timeframe while the ALU was simultaneously preparing for potential contract negotiations at JFK8, managing its sudden national prominence, and dealing with internal organizational challenges.

ALU organizers acknowledged they were stretched thin and couldn’t dedicate the same intensive person-by-person organizing that had succeeded at JFK8. The bus stop organizing strategy that worked at JFK8 was less effective at the smaller LDJ5, where different shift patterns and the part-time workforce made consistent contact more difficult.

2. Part-Time Workforce Dynamics The predominantly part-time workforce fundamentally changed organizing dynamics. Workers with other jobs or who viewed Amazon as temporary employment had less reason to invest in long-term workplace improvements. The union struggled to articulate what organizing would mean for workers who might not stay at Amazon long-term or who worked only a few hours per week.

Additionally, part-time workers were less likely to attend ALU organizing meetings or events outside of work, making it harder for the union to build the community and solidarity that had been crucial at JFK8.

3. Amazon’s Refined Tactics The JFK8 loss shocked Amazon and prompted the company to intensify its anti-union efforts at LDJ5:

Intensified Captive-Audience Meetings: Amazon shut down operations inside LDJ5 for an hour each shift to hold mandatory anti-union meetings. This aggressive tactic—stopping work entirely to focus on anti-union messaging—demonstrated Amazon’s determination to prevent another union victory.

Targeted Messaging: Amazon’s campaign addressed specific concerns of LDJ5’s part-time workforce, emphasizing that union dues (even if workers chose not to pay them under Right to Work laws) would take up a larger percentage of part-timers’ smaller paychecks. The company also suggested the union couldn’t deliver scheduling flexibility that part-time workers valued.

Learning from JFK8: Amazon adjusted its tactics based on what had failed at JFK8, becoming more sophisticated in its messaging and more aggressive in its campaign while being careful not to repeat illegal tactics that had caused problems at Bessemer.

4. Proximity to JFK8 Success Paradoxically, the proximity of the LDJ5 vote to the JFK8 victory may have hurt the ALU. Some workers may have assumed that Amazon would improve conditions at LDJ5 to prevent unionization, making the union seem unnecessary. Others may have wanted to wait to see whether the ALU could actually deliver a contract at JFK8 before committing to organize at LDJ5.

5. Different Grievance Intensity While LDJ5 workers faced difficult conditions, the grievances were not as acute as at JFK8. JFK8 workers dealt with extreme productivity quotas, high injury rates, and brutal full-shift conditions that created urgent motivation to organize. LDJ5 workers’ concerns, while legitimate, did not reach the same intensity level that had driven JFK8 organizing.

6. National Attention Pressure The enormous national attention on the LDJ5 vote after the JFK8 breakthrough may have created added pressure that hurt the campaign. The ALU was simultaneously managing media attention, requests from other workers nationwide seeking organizing support, and internal organizational challenges while trying to focus on LDJ5 workers. The celebrity of Christian Smalls and other ALU leaders, while beneficial in some ways, also made it easier for Amazon to portray the union as focused on national attention rather than LDJ5 workers’ specific needs.

ALU and Union Response

Christian Smalls and other ALU leaders acknowledged the defeat but emphasized the organizing would continue:

Immediate Reaction: Smalls stated after the vote: “The reality is, people are scared. Amazon spent a lot of money to prevent this union. We’re going to continue to organize. We’re not going away.”

Lessons Learned: The ALU recognized it needed to adjust strategies for smaller facilities with different workforce compositions. Organizers acknowledged spreading resources too thin and needing to build more sustained relationships with LDJ5 workers rather than relying on the momentum from JFK8.

Long-Term Perspective: Labor advocates emphasized that one loss did not negate the historic JFK8 victory or the potential for continued organizing. The ALU remained focused on securing a contract at JFK8 and continuing organizing efforts at other facilities.

Amazon’s Victory Statement

Amazon issued a triumphant statement emphasizing that workers had rejected the union: “We’re glad that our team at LDJ5 were able to have their voices heard, and that they chose to keep the direct relationship with Amazon, which we think is best for our employees.”

The statement ignored:

• Amazon’s intensive anti-union campaign that had stopped work for mandatory meetings
• The company’s multi-million dollar spending on union-busting consultants
• The fact that 38% of workers had still supported the union despite Amazon’s aggressive campaign
• The broader context of Amazon’s continued refusal to negotiate with the JFK8 union despite its clear election victory

Significance and Broader Context

The LDJ5 defeat provided important lessons for the labor movement:

1. Organizing Is Hard and Resource-Intensive The loss demonstrated that successful organizing requires sustained, intensive effort with adequate resources. The ALU’s limited resources meant it couldn’t replicate the intensive JFK8 campaign at every facility simultaneously.

2. Different Workforces Require Different Strategies Part-time workers require different organizing approaches than full-time workers. Unions need to tailor strategies to specific workforce compositions rather than assuming one approach will work everywhere.

3. Amazon Learns and Adapts Amazon’s refined tactics at LDJ5 showed the company was adapting its union-busting strategies based on what failed at JFK8. Successful organizing requires continuous innovation to counter evolving corporate tactics.

4. Contract Delivery Matters Workers’ hesitation at LDJ5 to organize before seeing whether the ALU could deliver a contract at JFK8 highlighted the importance of unions demonstrating they can actually improve conditions, not just win elections.

5. Momentum Is Not Automatic The JFK8 victory did not create automatic momentum for organizing other facilities. Each organizing campaign required its own intensive effort and relationship-building.

Impact on ALU’s Trajectory

The LDJ5 defeat had several consequences for the ALU:

Resource Constraints Exposed: The loss highlighted that the ALU’s limited resources made expanding difficult. Organizing multiple facilities simultaneously would require significantly more funding and staff than the grassroots GoFundMe model could provide.

Strategic Questions: The defeat prompted internal discussions about whether the ALU should focus on consolidating its JFK8 victory and winning a strong contract, or continue expanding to other facilities. These strategic differences would contribute to later internal divisions.

Pressure to Deliver Contract: The loss increased pressure on the ALU to deliver a strong contract at JFK8 to demonstrate the union’s value and rebuild momentum for future organizing.

Media Narrative Shift: After weeks of celebrating the historic JFK8 victory, media coverage now included the LDJ5 defeat, creating a more mixed narrative about the ALU’s trajectory and viability.

Amazon’s Continued Obstruction

Despite losing at JFK8 and winning at LDJ5, Amazon continued refusing to negotiate with the JFK8 union, filing objections and appeals that would delay recognition for over a year. This obstruction demonstrated that even when workers successfully organized, Amazon would deploy every legal strategy to avoid actually bargaining for a contract.

The LDJ5 defeat, combined with Amazon’s refusal to negotiate at JFK8, created a difficult situation for the ALU: the union had made history but couldn’t deliver concrete improvements while Amazon tied up recognition in legal challenges.

Long-Term Implications

The LDJ5 defeat did not erase the significance of the JFK8 victory, but it tempered expectations about rapid unionization of Amazon’s workforce. The loss demonstrated that:

• Amazon’s union-busting tactics remained effective, especially with different workforce compositions
• Organizing Amazon would require enormous sustained resources and effort
• The labor movement needed to support independent worker-led unions like the ALU with financial resources and strategic assistance
• Part-time and precarious workers faced distinct organizing challenges requiring tailored approaches
• Amazon would fight union organizing at every facility with full resources regardless of prior defeats

Despite the setback, the ALU and labor advocates remained committed to continuing organizing efforts, recognizing that building worker power at Amazon would require patience, learning from defeats, and sustained long-term commitment rather than expecting rapid expansion after the initial breakthrough.