Additional Coverage:
- Former Amazon employees sue over alleged discrimination against pregnant warehouse workers (abcnews.com)
A group of former Amazon warehouse workers has filed a proposed nationwide class-action lawsuit accusing the company of systemic discrimination against pregnant employees. The plaintiffs claim Amazon denied them basic accommodations and penalized those who took breaks for pumping breast milk or attending medical appointments.
The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in a federal court in Brooklyn, New York, alleges violations of the 2022 Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. This law mandates that employers with 15 or more employees provide reasonable accommodations for pregnancy-related medical needs unless doing so would cause undue hardship to the business.
Inimai Chettiar, president of the nonprofit A Better Balance-which is representing the plaintiffs alongside the law firm Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel-stated, “Denying a pregnant worker a stool, a lighter workload, or a bathroom break is a violation of federal law-it’s that simple. Amazon has built an empire on speed and efficiency-speed and efficiency that too often sacrifices the rights of pregnant workers it refuses to accommodate.”
Amazon has denied the allegations, calling the lawsuit’s account inaccurate. Spokesperson Kelly Nantel emphasized the company’s commitment to employee well-being, noting that Amazon approved more than 99.9% of pregnancy-related accommodation requests in the past year. Nantel added that the claims presented by A Better Balance omit important details and contain inaccuracies.
A Better Balance, which led the decade-long campaign for the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, has highlighted the challenges faced by thousands of women, particularly low-wage workers, who have been forced out of jobs after requesting accommodations such as chairs, lighter duties, or time off for prenatal care.
The law received strong bipartisan support and took effect in June 2023. However, it has faced legal challenges, including lawsuits from Republican-led states and religious organizations opposing regulations that extended accommodations to workers seeking abortions.
A federal judge struck down the abortion-related provision last year, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)-now under Republican leadership-plans to revise those regulations. Texas has also filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the law’s passage.
Despite ongoing legal disputes, the EEOC continues to enforce the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and pursue companies that deny accommodations to pregnant workers.
The Amazon lawsuit points to prior state investigations in New Jersey and New York, as well as EEOC findings, that documented discriminatory and retaliatory practices against pregnant employees.
One plaintiff, Jennifer Hatch, worked in a physically demanding role processing customer returns in Lancaster, New York. After discovering she was pregnant in January 2025, her doctor classified her pregnancy as high-risk due to her age and recommended regular sitting breaks.
Hatch requested a 30-pound lifting limit, 15-minute sitting breaks every four hours, and a maximum eight-hour shift. According to the lawsuit, Amazon delayed and ultimately denied these requests.
In March 2025, a manager allegedly refused to let Hatch use an available chair because her accommodation had not been approved, despite her struggling to breathe. When she left work early multiple times to seek hospital care for pregnancy-related abdominal pain worsened by prolonged standing, Amazon docked her unpaid time off and eventually fired her for attendance violations.
Chettiar emphasized the broader implications: “Lower wage, shift, and hourly women workers are foundational to this country’s economy-yet they’re being treated as disposable. Practices that deny pregnant workers simple accommodations that pose no threat to productivity are not just unfair, they’re illegal.”