The results of the Amazon Union Vote have arrived, and after a much-anticipated vote, the verdict is no on unionization. 

Approximately 3,215 ballots were cast, out of the 5,800 workers at the Amazon warehouse BHM1 in Bessemer, Ala., on whether or not they should be granted unionization into the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union (RWDSU). They were granted their answer of no on Friday, April 9. 

Amazon has historically been an anti-union company, maintaining that their workers receive fair wages, and are treated well, and that unionization would only ultimately damage their wages as a result of the dues that accompany unionization. 

However, the RWDSU states that the reasonings behind the call for unionization was not solely related to wages or benefits, but rather stemmed from unrealistic expectations when it came to the performance of Amazon warehouse employees. Unionization was intended to allow workers to have some say in matters regarding these expectations as well as training and compensation.  

The vote, had it passed, was considered to have the potential to send waves of unionization throughout Amazon, sending a message to the other 800,000 Amazon employees across the nation that unionization was possible for them as well. It was also suspected that the very idea that a company as large as Amazon was still under the influence of its workers, would send a message countrywide about what employees of corporations could be capable of. It seemed experts had high hopes of what the repercussions of this election could mean for the culture of Amazon and other corporations within the United States. 

“This is happening in the toughest state, with the toughest company, at the toughest moment. If the union can prevail given those three facts, it will send a message that Amazon is organizable everywhere,” Janice Fine, a professor at Rutgers University, said prior to the end of the election. 

Although the official word currently is that Amazon has been victorious in the election, the RWDSU has also stated that they intend to challenge the results of the election, on account of potential corporate interference with the employees.