Amazon Rotten Score Breakdown

In November 2023, a National Labor Relations Board administrative law judge found that Amazon.com Services LLC violated federal labor law by retaliating against workers at its Staten Island, New York facilities because they supported the Amazon Labor Union or engaged in other legally protected collective activity. The case concerned Amazon workers organizing around the Amazon Labor Union at the company's Staten Island operations. Unlike a private lawsuit containing unresolved worker allegations, the findings came from an NLRB administrative law judge after litigation of the unfair-labor-practice charges. National Labor Relations Board – Amazon retaliation decision: https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/news-story/region-29-brooklyn-wins-administrative-law-judge-decision-finding-amazon On November 21, 2023, Administrative Law Judge Lauren Esposito found that Amazon violated the National Labor Relations Act by dismissing employees early, changing employees' work assignments and subjecting employees to closer supervision in retaliation for their support of the Amazon Labor Union or their participation in protected concerted activities. The judge also found additional unlawful conduct during the organizing campaign. According to the NLRB, Amazon unlawfully interrogated employees, prohibited employees from distributing union literature and confiscated union literature from workers. The decision additionally found that Amazon unlawfully disparaged the Amazon Labor Union through appeals to racial prejudice and derogatory racial stereotyping. These are significant distinctions for the evidence: they are not simply allegations made by the Amazon Labor Union. They were findings made by an NLRB administrative law judge applying the National Labor Relations Act. The judge ordered Amazon to cease and desist from the unlawful conduct. Amazon was also ordered to make an adversely affected worker whole for lost earnings and benefits, other direct or foreseeable financial harms and adverse tax consequences resulting from the company's conduct. NLRB case information: https://www.nlrb.gov/case/29-CA-308071 The labor dispute did not end with the original 2023 ruling. Related and consolidated unfair-labor-practice proceedings involving Amazon's Staten Island operations continued before the NLRB. The NLRB docket shows that another administrative law judge decision was issued on July 23, 2025, followed by an amended decision and transfer of proceedings to the National Labor Relations Board. In 2026, the parties moved toward settlement. The official NLRB docket records a bilateral settlement agreement dated June 26, 2026, followed by an NLRB General Counsel settlement approval letter dated July 7, 2026. Current NLRB docket: https://www.nlrb.gov/case/29-CA-308071 As of August 2026, however, the NLRB's public case page still labels Case 29-CA-308071 “Open.” The evidence should therefore distinguish the approved 2026 settlement from a claim that every related Amazon/Staten Island labor proceeding has been finally closed. Company position: Amazon contested unfair-labor-practice allegations during the proceedings. The eventual 2026 settlement resolves relevant disputes through an agreement rather than converting every allegation made throughout the broader Staten Island organizing campaign into an admitted factual finding. The strongest evidence in this entry therefore remains the conduct that the administrative law judge specifically found unlawful. Key facts: An NLRB administrative law judge found in November 2023 that Amazon retaliated against employees for supporting the Amazon Labor Union or engaging in protected collective activity; the retaliation included sending employees home early, altering work assignments and subjecting workers to closer supervision; the judge also found unlawful interrogation and interference with distribution of union literature; Amazon was ordered to cease the unlawful conduct and compensate an affected employee for financial losses; related Staten Island proceedings continued afterward; an additional ALJ decision was issued in July 2025; and the NLRB docket records a bilateral settlement on June 26, 2026 and approval on July 7, 2026. The case is significant because federal labor law protects employees' right to organize collectively without employer retaliation. Here, the NLRB administrative law judge found that Amazon did more than express opposition to unionization: the company changed the treatment of individual workers because of their union support or other protected activity. That makes this materially different from Rotten Company's existing Amazon warehouse-safety evidence and provides independently documented evidence concerning Amazon's treatment of organized labor.

Reports describe high injury rates and intense productivity pressure in Amazon warehouses, with algorithmic monitoring and strict quotas contributing to worker harm.

In July 2026, The Guardian published confidential Amazon training materials disclosed during the California Attorney General's antitrust lawsuit against the company. The documents, marked "Amazon Confidential," instruct employees not to discuss Amazon's pricing methods with vendors, not to explain the company's pricing tools, and to avoid discussing channel pricing or price matching in certain communications. Another training slide advises employees to avoid using competitor names when requesting pricing actions. The California Attorney General cites these and other internal documents as evidence in its allegations that Amazon's pricing practices reduced competition. Amazon denies the allegations, and the litigation is ongoing. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2026/jul/21/amazon-tactics-prices

In 2026, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a historic $2.5 billion settlement with Amazon over allegations that the company enrolled tens of millions of consumers into Amazon Prime subscriptions without their knowledge or consent and made it difficult to cancel those subscriptions. Under the settlement, Amazon agreed to pay $1.5 billion in consumer refunds, a $1 billion civil penalty, and to stop the unlawful enrollment and cancellation practices identified by the FTC. Amazon denied wrongdoing as part of the settlement. The FTC also established a refund program for eligible U.S. Prime customers.