Amazon Accused of Firing Pregnant Workers After Denying Basic Accommodations in Nationwide Class Action

Amazon is accused of denying pregnant warehouse workers basic accommodations and then disciplining or firing them when pregnancy-related breaks and medical absences counted against their attendance records, according to a proposed nationwide class action filed Tuesday.

Four former Amazon employees brought the lawsuit in federal court in Brooklyn, New York, alleging the company violated the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and New York labor laws. The workers say Amazon refused or delayed requests for seating, bathroom and water breaks, lifting restrictions and time off for prenatal appointments.

Some employees were ultimately fired after pregnancy-related absences depleted their available unpaid time, the complaint alleges.

Amazon disputes the allegations. Company spokesperson Kelly Nantel said the accounts of the four plaintiffs contain inaccuracies and omit important details. Amazon says it provides pregnancy-related accommodations to tens of thousands of workers each year and approved more than 99.9% of requests during the past year.

One plaintiff says the consequences became especially severe during a high-risk pregnancy. Willamina Barclay, a former employee at an Amazon warehouse in Rochester, New York, says she requested additional breaks, a seated position and a 15-pound lifting restriction.

Barclay was taken from the warehouse in a wheelchair and hospitalized in June 2025 after experiencing severe abdominal pain while lifting items, according to the complaint. The lawsuit says Amazon sent her a termination warning the next day because the absence pushed her beyond her available unpaid time. She was fired five days later.

Jennifer Hatch, who worked at an Amazon facility in Lancaster, New York, alleges she repeatedly sought permission to sit while working after becoming pregnant. Delays or denials of her requests contributed to reductions in her unpaid time balance before she was terminated, the complaint claims.

A third plaintiff, Kristina Green, alleges she encountered accommodation problems during pregnancy and again after returning from childbirth, when she needed breaks to pump breast milk. Green claims she was disciplined over the length of those breaks and fired in May.

The claims put Amazon’s attendance and accommodation systems at the center of the case. The former employees argue that workers can request pregnancy-related changes while still being penalized under separate attendance rules for the time those accommodations require.

The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act took effect in June 2023 and generally requires employers with at least 15 workers to provide reasonable accommodations for known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth or associated medical conditions unless the changes would impose an undue hardship.

Federal guidance specifically identifies several accommodations raised in the Amazon lawsuit, including additional bathroom or water breaks, seating, help with lifting and leave for medical appointments. The law also protects pregnancy-related limitations that would not qualify as disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

EEOC rules further restrict when employers may require medical documentation for certain basic pregnancy accommodations. That issue could become significant in the Amazon case because the plaintiffs allege workers were required in some instances to provide paperwork before their requests were approved.

The case follows broader scrutiny of Amazon’s treatment of pregnant workers. In February, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued a determination finding systemic violations of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act involving Amazon warehouse employees, including alleged failures to accommodate pregnancy-related limitations and cases in which workers were forced onto leave.

New Jersey also sued Amazon in 2025 over alleged pregnancy and disability discrimination at its warehouses.

The four former employees are seeking to represent a nationwide group of current and former pregnant Amazon workers affected by the challenged practices. A judge has not certified the case as a class action.

The lawsuit seeks lost wages and benefits, punitive damages, and a court order barring the practices challenged by the plaintiffs. The workers must still persuade a judge to certify the proposed nationwide class before they can pursue the claims on behalf of other Amazon employees.