The retail giant Amazon could be in big legal trouble in New Jersey after the state's Attorney General's office filed a lawsuit accusing the company of failing to provide legally required accommodations to pregnant and disabled warehouse workers. The explosive suit, brought by the New Jersey Attorney General's Office, claims Amazon routinely denied or inadequately responded to requests for time off, relief from heavy lifting, or other modifications that would allow expectant or disabled employees to continue their work safely. Amazon has responded to these allegations.
Allegations Against Amazon
At the heart of this shocking lawsuit is the accusation that Amazon reportedly denied or ignored reasonable accommodation requests from disabled or pregnant warehouse workers. Moreover, according to the complaint, when workers allegedly requested modifications such as light duty, fewer hours or exemption from heavy lifting, Amazon allegedly either placed them on unpaid leave or in roles they could not perform. The state's suit further argues that even when accommodations were granted, the workers still faced performance quotas that they could not meet, putting them at risk of firing.
Furthermore, the legal filing cites the state's anti-discrimination laws which reportedly mandate that employers provide reasonable accommodations to individuals with disabilities and pregnant workers. Attorney General Matthew Planktin gave a stinging statement saying,
'In building a trillion-dollar business, Amazon has flagrantly violated (workers') rights and ignored their well-being - all while it continues to profit off their labor,'
Amazon's Response and Implications
However, Amazon in response to this contentious lawsuit denied the base claims and pointed to its internal statistics which reportedly say that it has approved over 99 percent of pregnancy accommodation requests and has processed more than 72,500 such requests in the US since 2022. Furthemore, Amazon's spokesperson emphasised that ensuring the health and wellbeing of employees is the company's 'top priority' and reiterated that the company offers up to 20 weeks of paid parental leave, along with pregnancy and post-birth accommodations as per reports. So while Amazon claims high rates of approved requests, the state's lawsuit paints a picture of systemic problems at its New Jersey warehouse operations.
Moreover, this lawsuit is not the first time Amazon has faced allegations of discrimination related to pregnancy or disability. In August, the company reportedly settled a proposed class-action lawsuit in California that claimed pregnant employees were not permitted to take leave. Adding to that, the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is also reportedly investigating similar claims that Amazon failed to offer required accommodations to pregnant workers under federal law.
Now given Amazon's size, as it is the second largest private employer in the United States and operates nearly 40 distribution centres in New Jersey alone, plus smaller 'sort centres' employing around 50,000 workers in the state as per reports this case could have huge ramifications for the company and for labour practices in the whole of logistics industry.
This lawsuit raises important questions about how large employers manage accommodation requests for vulnerable workers in high pressure operational environments. Moreover, for pregnant and disabled workers, the ability to secure modifications is not merely a convenience but a legal right under state and federal statutes. Therefore the case puts a bright spotlight on whether Amazon's rapid fulfilment model may be at odds with its responsibilities to accommodate employees who cannot perform standard warehouse tasks without adjustment.
Originally published on IBTimes UK
