Amazon is facing a proposed nationwide class action filed Tuesday in Brooklyn federal court accusing the company of systematically denying pregnant warehouse workers basic accommodations, including chairs, bathroom breaks, water breaks, and time off for prenatal appointments. Four former warehouse employees filed the complaint, alleging Amazon threatened and fired pregnant workers who missed too much work or requested help managing their pregnancies on the job.
The lawsuit was filed by A Better Balance, a nonprofit advocating for workers’ rights, according to the Honolulu Star-Advertiser. Civil rights firm Emery Celli Brinckerhoff Abady Ward & Maazel LLP is serving as co-counsel, representing named plaintiffs Jennifer Hatch, Willamina Barclay, Kristina Green, and Dazaria Parks, per A Better Balance. The complaint alleges violations of the federal Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and New York labor law, and it seeks lost pay and benefits, punitive damages, and an injunction against discrimination against pregnant employees.
Among the specific allegations detailed in the complaint: Jennifer Hatch of Buffalo was fired following a pregnancy-related hospitalization after being denied seating, while Kristina Green of Rochester was repeatedly penalized and fired in May 2026 for taking pregnancy-related breaks, according to A Better Balance. Willamina Barclay, another named plaintiff, suffered severe abdominal pain from lifting heavy objects and was taken by wheelchair from Amazon’s Rochester warehouse to a hospital on June 16, 2025. She received a termination warning the following day and was fired five days later, on June 22, 2025 — with Amazon claiming her hospital visit had pushed her over her limit for unpaid time off, the Star-Advertiser reported. The complaint also says Amazon docked Barclay because she worked only part of that day.
Algorithms Flagging Medical Breaks as ‘Off-Task’
The lawsuit alleges that Amazon’s automated productivity tracking systems penalized pregnant and postpartum workers by logging lactation room visits and medical breaks as time off-task or deducting them from unpaid time-off balances, according to Quartz. That automated system is central to the case because it sits in direct tension with protections under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which took effect in June 2023. The complaint cites the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act and related EEOC regulations.
Amazon disputes the allegations. Spokesperson Kelly Nantel said the four plaintiffs’ accounts contain inaccuracies and omit important details, and said the company approved more than 99.9% of pregnancy-related accommodation requests over the past year. Nantel added that Amazon provides pregnancy-related accommodations to tens of thousands of employees annually and said ensuring the health and well-being of employees is one of the company’s greatest responsibilities, according to the Star-Advertiser’s report.
A Pattern That Predates This Lawsuit
The case did not emerge in isolation. Nearly 200 Amazon workers contacted A Better Balance’s free legal helpline in 2026 alone over pregnancy accommodation issues at the company, per reporting from Fast Company. Following employee filings in 2020 and 2021, the EEOC had already opened a broader systemic investigation into whether Amazon routinely denies pregnancy accommodations and forces workers onto unpaid medical leave, Fast Company also reported.
New York has its own history with the company. In May 2022, then-Governor Kathy Hochul announced that the state Division of Human Rights had filed a complaint against Amazon, alleging facility managers routinely overruled designated accommodation consultants to deny light-duty requests to pregnant workers, according to the New York State Governor’s Office.
New Jersey took its own action in October 2025, when Attorney General Matthew Platkin sued Amazon in state Superior Court, alleging a ten-year pattern of denying pregnancy and disability accommodations and automatically forcing requesting workers onto unpaid leave, per the New Jersey Office of the Attorney General. State filings in that case showed Amazon warehouse employees in New Jersey made more than 27,000 accommodation requests for pregnancy or disability over a two-year span — averaging more than one request per hour — with many facing delays, denials, or forced unpaid leave, according to WRNJ Radio. A New Jersey state Superior Court judge rejected Amazon’s request to dismiss that case on July 31, and it continues to move forward, the Star-Advertiser noted.
A National Snapshot of Pregnancy Accommodations
The friction extends beyond Amazon. A June 2026 national survey by the National Partnership for Women and Families found that 35% of working mothers received only partial workplace adjustments during pregnancy, and 9% received none at all, per Ground News. The EEOC also plans to propose changes to the regulations underlying the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act as soon as November 2026, according to the Star-Advertiser, following comments from EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas in 2024 that the regulations for pregnant employees are too broad.
Amazon, based in Seattle, is the second-largest private employer in the United States, behind Walmart, with 1.58 million full-time and part-time employees at the end of 2025. That scale sits at the heart of the plaintiffs’ argument: attorneys say the automated systems and documentation demands described in the complaint reflect not isolated errors but a structural pattern affecting a workforce spread across the country.
