A Teamsters-led rally on the steps of New York City’s city hall Thursday marked the reintroduction of a law that would require final mile delivery companies such as Amazon to be licensed by the city. The proposed Delivery Protection Act would subject these companies to more regulation than they currently face. While it applies only to deliveries in a city of 8 million people, the law represents a microcosm of numerous legal battles over independent contractor and joint employer status.
The Delivery Protection Act first appeared in the New York City council last September. The council finished its term at the end of 2025 without the bill ever receiving a committee hearing. Its backers said the calendar simply ran out before the bill could pass. With a new council in place, supporters needed to reintroduce it. The legislation’s primary sponsor is Tiffany Caban, a Democrat. She was the key speaker at the city hall rally.
When this delivery regulation law died at the end of 2025, it had 41 co-sponsors out of a City Council of 51 members. Immediately upon its second introduction, it had 27. A Council official at the rally said the latest version has only minor changes in its wording.
Amazon in the Crosshairs
Although plenty of last-mile facilities operate in New York City, the 100-plus Teamsters members standing on the city hall steps spoke of only one company. The various speakers, including several drivers from Direct Service Providers that deliver goods out of Amazon warehouses, discussed the demands of the job. Jerome Sloss, a driver with a New York-area DSP, said that Amazon “continues to grind drivers into the dust with their unrealistic expectations and their policies.” He said the job of a DSP driver is “extremely taxing on our mental and physical health.”
However, the delivery regulation law has no specific rules about how a delivery driver should be treated. Instead, it creates a licensing process through the city’s Department of Consumer and Worker Protection. That department, if it finds a “pattern of practice of violations,” could deny or revoke a license. The violations would need to involve workplace safety, road safety, environmental protection, trade practices, or worker protections.
The proposed bill appears carefully written to avoid catching every last-mile delivery company. It would apply to “operators of certain warehouses and storage facilities from which goods are delivered to final consumers in the City.” This definition doesn’t exclusively fit Amazon. But the speeches at the rally made clear that the company is the bill’s chief target. No other companies received mention, not DHL, not UPS, not FedEx.
Independent Contractor Debate
This delivery regulation law enters tricky legal territory. It wades into a long-standing battle over independent contractor status and the issue of joint employment. The question centers on whether an independently-owned DSP operating out of an Amazon warehouse is truly independent or simply an extension of Amazon as a facility operator.
Sloss summed up the argument that DSP drivers ultimately work for Amazon. “You see us wearing the Amazon uniforms, you see us driving Amazon vans, and we are subject to their oversight policies,” Sloss said in his address. “They label us as third party contractors, but nothing could be further from the truth.” He said Amazon excuses “bad business practices” by “pointing their fingers at the DSPs, rather than taking accountability for the way they do business.”
A coalition called the NY Delivers Coalition has formed to oppose the measure. It includes several chambers of commerce, logistics companies, and other business groups. Amazon is not listed as a member. In a statement to FreightWaves, a coalition spokesperson criticized the bill.
“This act would drive many of these businesses out of the city or out of business entirely,” the group said. “That would result in the loss of thousands of jobs, higher prices, slower delivery, and increased congestion and pollution.” The statement noted that New York City faces an affordability crisis in child care, health care, and housing. “Eliminating the small businesses that enable last-mile delivery solves none of these problems while making essential goods and services more expensive for all New Yorkers.”
NLRB Case Connection
If the delivery regulation law passes, its implementation would likely become entangled with questions about Amazon as a joint employer. Amazon and the Teamsters are now locked in a case before an administrative law judge in NLRB Region 31 on the West Coast. The case involves a DSP called Battle Tested Strategies. It considers whether Amazon is a joint employer of DSP drivers due to the control it exercises over DSP activity.
The trial before the ALJ started in September following an earlier opinion that Amazon was a joint employer. The process has been stop-and-start since it began. A Teamsters official at the rally said it remains ongoing months later. What has happened so far has mostly gone the Teamsters’ way. Beyond the initial opinion, the agency maintained that view in the opening days of the hearing. This occurred even though a Trump NLRB presented the argument, not the Biden administration. A side battle in federal court also recently favored the Teamsters.
Whatever decision the NLRB ultimately reaches could affect any litigation arising from the Delivery Protection Act. If DSP drivers are not Amazon employees, which is the company’s argument, how can New York City take action against Amazon via licensing for practices implemented by DSPs? But if the NLRB process concludes that the Amazon-DSP link marks a joint employer relationship, that could strengthen the city’s position.
Supreme Court Case Looms
Another ongoing legal case could become part of any court battle over the delivery regulation law. The U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on March 25 in the case known as Flowers Foods. The case involves a commercial baker whose products include Tastykakes and Wonder Bread. The question is whether a final mile delivery driver, even if their vehicle never crosses state lines, is part of interstate commerce because their work sits at the tail end of an interstate process.
If the court rules those drivers are part of interstate commerce, it could become a legal point for delivery companies likely to challenge the Delivery Protection Act. Their argument would presumably involve jurisdiction. They would claim the city of New York is out of its lane in trying to regulate interstate commerce on a local level.
The immediate practical outcome of a Flowers Foods ruling would determine whether disputes with employers can go to court or must proceed through arbitration. But the interstate commerce finding itself could provide a constitutional challenge to local regulation.
Business Opposition
The NY Delivers Coalition represents a significant opposition force. Its formation specifically to fight this delivery regulation law indicates the stakes involved. Business groups see the law as creating precedent that could spread to other cities. If New York succeeds in licensing last-mile facilities, other municipalities might follow.
The coalition’s argument about job losses carries weight in a city concerned about economic recovery. Thousands of delivery jobs have emerged in recent years as e-commerce expanded. Many of these positions provide entry-level employment with paths to advancement. Eliminating them would hit vulnerable communities hardest.
Higher prices and slower delivery also resonate with consumers. New Yorkers have grown accustomed to rapid e-commerce fulfillment. Any disruption to that system would face public backlash. The coalition hopes these concerns will give council members pause before supporting the measure.
Teamsters Strategy
For the Teamsters, this delivery regulation law represents a new front in their campaign against Amazon. The union has tried traditional organizing, NLRB complaints, and public pressure campaigns. Licensing creates a regulatory pathway to address worker concerns without winning an election or bargaining a contract.
The rally on city hall steps demonstrated the union’s ability to mobilize members. Drivers in Amazon uniforms standing together sent a visual message. Speakers connected individual experiences to broader policy arguments. The presence of multiple council members showed political support.
The fact that the previous version had 41 co-sponsors suggests strong backing. Even with the new council, 27 co-sponsors immediately signed on. Supporters likely believe they can reach a majority as the legislative process moves forward.
Looking Ahead
As this delivery regulation law progresses through the council, both sides will intensify their efforts. Supporters will gather more co-sponsors and push for committee hearings. Opponents will lobby council members and make their case to the public. Mayor Eric Adams’ position could prove decisive if the bill reaches his desk.
Legal challenges will follow if the bill becomes law. The business coalition has signaled its readiness to sue. The joint employer question and interstate commerce arguments provide multiple grounds for litigation. Courts may ultimately decide the fate of this law regardless of what the council does.
For DSP drivers like Jerome Sloss, the outcome carries immediate consequences. Working conditions, pay, and job security all hang in the balance. The delivery regulation law offers hope of addressing long-standing grievances. Whether that hope materializes depends on political battles in the council and legal battles in the courts.