Former Amazon employees sue over alleged discrimination against pregnant
warehouse workers
[September 10, 2026] By
CLAIRE SAVAGE
A group of former Amazon warehouse employees is suing the company for
systemically discriminating against pregnant workers, accusing the
company of denying them basic accommodations and penalizing some who
took breaks to pump milk or time off for hospital visits.
The four plaintiffs filed a proposed nationwide class action in a
Brooklyn, New York federal court Tuesday, accusing Amazon of violating
the 2022 Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which requires employers with 15
or more workers to provide a “reasonable accommodation” for pregnancy
and childbirth related medical conditions. To refuse an accommodation,
companies must show it would create “undue hardship” for the business.
“Denying a pregnant worker a stool, a lighter workload, or a bathroom
break is a violation of federal law — it’s that simple," said Inimai
Chettiar, president of A Better Balance, a nonprofit organization that
is representing the plaintiffs along with the law firm Emery Celli
Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel. "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 denied the accusations, saying the lawsuit’s description of
events is inaccurate.
“Ensuring the health and well-being of our employees is one of our
greatest responsibilities, and we strive to provide a safe and
supportive environment for everyone, which includes supporting tens of
thousands of employees with pregnancy accommodations each year," said
Kelly Nantel, an Amazon spokesperson.
Nantel said Amazon has approved “more than 99.9% of pregnancy related
accommodations” over the past year and that “the accounts shared by A
Better Balance contain inaccuracies and omit important details.”
A Better Balance spearheaded a decade-long campaign for the Pregnant
Workers Fairness Act, drawing attention to the plight of thousands of
women, especially low-wage workers, who have been pushed out of work for
requesting accommodations such as a chair or stool, leave to attend
prenatal appointments, light duty for manual labor, or temporary
reassignment.
The law passed with overwhelming bipartisan support and took effect in
June 2023 but has since been embroiled in several lawsuits filed by
Republican-led states and religious groups, which objected to
regulations passed by the Biden-era Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission establishing that workers seeking abortions are entitled to
accommodations.
[to top of second column] |
 A federal judge last year struck
down the abortion provision of the regulations, which the EEOC, now
led by a Republican majority, plans to revise. A separate lawsuit
filed by the state of Texas takes aim at the entirety of the law,
claiming its passage was unconstitutional because a majority of
House members were not physically present to approve the law as part
of a spending package in December 2022.
Despite those disputes, the EEOC has been regularly enforcing the
Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, pursuing companies who deny pregnant
workers accommodations.
The new lawsuit against Amazon claims the company's “discriminatory
and retaliatory policies” against pregnant workers have already been
well-documented in state investigations in New Jersey and New York
and EEOC findings.
One of the plaintiffs, Jennifer Hatch, worked in a role processing
customer returns in Lancaster, New York, which involved standing for
several hours at a time and lifting boxes of various weights to sort
their contents. After she found out she was pregnant in January
2025, her doctor determined her pregnancy to be high-risk due to her
age, and recommended she sit down at regular intervals.
But when she requested a 30-pound lifting restriction, a sitting
break for 15 minutes every four hours, and a maximum of eight hours
per shift, Amazon delayed and then denied the requests, according to
the lawsuit.
Then, in early March 2025, a manager refused to let Hatch sit in an
available chair since her accommodation was not approved, although
she was struggling to breathe, the complaint says. And when she
clocked out of work early multiple times to go to the hospital for
pregnancy-related abdominal pain, exacerbated by standing for long
periods at work, Amazon docked her unpaid time off balance and later
fired her for violating an attendance policy.
“Lower wage, shift, and hourly women workers are foundational to
this country’s economy — yet they’re being treated as disposable.
And practices that deny pregnant workers simple accommodations that
pose no threat to productivity are not just unfair, they’re
illegal,” Chettiar told AP in an emailed statement.
All contents © copyright 2026 Associated Press. All rights reserved
 |
