Three Amazon software engineers have filed a formal complaint with the Seattle Office for Civil Rights, alleging that the company engaged in unlawful retaliation following their testimony before the Seattle City Council concerning data center regulations.

三名亞馬遜軟體工程師向西雅圖民權辦公室提交了正式投訴，指稱公司在他們就數據中心法規於西雅圖市議會作證後，採取了非法報復行動。

The dispute originates from public hearings conducted by the Seattle City Council to evaluate a moratorium on large-scale data center construction. Five Amazon employees, affiliated with the Amazon Employees for Climate Justice (AECJ), provided testimony advocating for stringent regulation of AI infrastructure due to environmental and social externalities. On June 9, the City Council unanimously enacted a one-year moratorium to facilitate research into the impact of such facilities on public health, water usage, and utility rates.

這起糾紛源於西雅圖市議會為了評估暫停大規模數據中心建設而舉行的公開聽證會。五名隸屬於「亞馬遜氣候正義員工會」(AECJ) 的亞馬遜員工提供證詞，主張由於環境與社會的外部影響，應對 AI 基礎設施實施嚴格監管。6月9日，市議會一致通過暫停建設一年，以便研究此類設施對公共健康、用水量及電費率的影響。

Subsequent to these proceedings, Patrick Schloesser, Darius Irani, and Liesl Wigand were summoned to individual meetings with Amazon's Employee Relations department. The claimants assert that these sessions were interrogatory in nature and that they were notified of pending internal investigations that could result in disciplinary measures, including termination. The employees contend that their identification as AECJ members did not constitute an unauthorized representation of the corporation, and thus, the investigations violate a Seattle ordinance prohibiting employment discrimination based on political beliefs and organizational affiliations.

在這些程序之後，Patrick Schloesser、Darius Irani 與 Liesl Wigand 被要求與亞馬遜的員工關係部門個別面談。申訴人主張這些會議具有審問性質，且他們被通知正處於內部調查中，可能會面臨包括解僱在內的紀律處分。員工認為，他們表明自己是 AECJ 成員並不構成未經授權代表公司，因此，這些調查違反了西雅圖禁止基於政治信仰與組織隸屬關係而歧視僱用的條例。

Conversely, Amazon management maintains that the investigations are necessary to determine whether the employees violated corporate communications policies by acting as unauthorized spokespersons. A company representative stated that the probe seeks to establish if the individuals were speaking as private citizens or in their capacity as employees. This friction occurs against a broader institutional backdrop of significant capital expenditure on AI infrastructure and a history of labor disputes, including a 2021 settlement involving the termination of AECJ founders.

相反地，亞馬遜管理層堅持認為，調查是必要的，旨在確定員工是否透過充當未經授權的發言人而違反了公司的溝通政策。公司代表表示，調查旨在釐清這些人是以私人公民身份或以員工身份發言。這種摩擦發生在一個更廣泛的機構背景下，即公司在 AI 基礎設施方面有巨額資本支出，且有勞資糾紛歷史，包括 2021 年一次涉及解僱 AECJ 創辦人的和解協議。

The matter currently awaits a determination from the Seattle Office for Civil Rights to ascertain if Amazon's internal investigations constitute a violation of municipal law.

目前正等待西雅圖民權辦公室的決定，以確定亞馬遜的內部調查是否違反了市政法例。