AnalysisRead Next
Investigative
Study of prenatal Tylenol exposure suggests reproductive organ changes in girls
Kelli Keane
·Spotlight Articles
Class-action lawsuit accuses Amazon of systemic pregnancy discrimination
A new lawsuit has alleged that Amazon routinely discriminates against current or previously pregnant employees.
A new lawsuit has been filed accusing Amazon of pregnancy discrimination.
Employees allege they were denied accommodations, such as the ability to take breaks or restrictions on how much weight they could lift.
Employees say that when they took time off due to pregnancy-related reasons, they were fired or threatened with termination.
A Better Balance, a non-profit organization dedicated to workers' rights, is representing pregnant Amazon employees who claim to have been discriminated against in violation of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA).
A nationwide class-action lawsuit has been filed, claiming that basic accommodations for pregnant employees were not provided, and that pregnant women who took time off relating to pregnancy were either fired or threatened with termination.
Amazon was previously the subject of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) complaints as well as multiple state investigations.
The stories of several plaintiffs were shared with USA Today.
38-year-old Willamina Barclay had previously suffered a miscarriage while at work, and had been diagnosed with another high-risk pregnancy.
She requested accommodations relating to her pregnancy, such as being allowed to remain seated, take extra breaks, no repetitive squatting, no climbing ladders, and a 15-pound weight limit on lifting items. Some of those accommodations were denied, and others were delayed, leading Barclay to experience severe abdominal pain while lifting heavy objects.
Her sister picked her up from work to go to the emergency room, and Barclay received a "Termination Warning Email" e-mail the next day. When she continued to be ill, she provided a doctor's note explaining she was experiencing pregnancy-related issues, and was fired four days later.
"I really don’t want pregnant women to experience the things that I’ve experienced at Amazon," she told USA Today. "I don’t want them to feel like they’re disposable."
Barclay was unemployed for months afterwards, saying she struggled to find a new job because she was visibly pregnant when she went to interviews, and as such, no one wanted to hire her.
Jennifer Hatch is another plaintiff, and previously shared her experience with the New York Times.
She wasn't pregnant when she was first hired, and had no problems with the physical aspects of the job, like remaining standing for long periods of time. But several months later, when she got pregnant, that changed.
Her asthma worsened, and she experienced abdominal pain if she stood for too long. Her doctor provided paperwork saying she should be allowed to sit throughout the day, but Amazon refused to comply.
At one point, she was struggling to breathe, and sat down, only for a supervisor to order her to stand again. She left work in an ambulance several times with abdominal pain, and in March of 2025, returned to work only to learn she had been fired, as her hospital visits had exceeded her total allotted time off by 90 minutes.
Meanwhile, she had been working part-time at a gas station, where her supervisors were incredibly accommodating of her pregnancy.
"The manager automatically had a chair behind the register ready for me," she told USA Today.
A third woman, Kristina Green, said she was fired for taking breaks to pump breast milk for her baby.
During her pregnancy, she had requested accommodations which, as with the other plaintiffs, were denied. She was allowed to take breaks throughout the day, but each one was deducted from her time-off balance.
Once she gave birth, she had access to a lactation room, but it was a 10-minute walk away, and her break time began as soon as she left her station.
"I tried not to spend a lot of time pumping because there was multiple times I got in trouble for taking too long," she told USA TODAY, and confirmed that she ultimately was fired.
Amazon has come under fire for pregnancy discrimination before.
Patty Hernandez said she requested a less strenuous role at Amazon when she got pregnant, which was denied. Hernandez ultimately suffered a miscarriage.
Four women at Amazon’s Oklahoma City fulfillment center alleged circumstances almost identical to Hernandez.
In 2019, CNET reviewed seven lawsuits against Amazon filed on behalf of pregnant women, reporting, “The requests [from the pregnant women] included longer bathroom breaks and fewer continuous hours on their feet… but in all of the cases the expectant mothers were fired after telling their managers they were pregnant. Six of the cases were settled out of court.”
Unfortunately, Amazon is far from alone.
Pregnancy discrimination is alarmingly common across the country, with former employees of Walmart, Google, Walgreens, UPS, Nike, and many other corporations accusing the companies of pregnancy discrimination or mistreatment.
Yet instead of acknowledging this issue, many companies began offering female employees abortion benefits instead of providing truly family-friendly work environments, which then implicitly pressures women to choose between their careers and their children.
Pregnancy discrimination is a serious issue that too often goes unacknowledged.
Women deserve the ability to have a meaningful career without having to fear that a pregnancy will lead to discrimination or termination from their jobs.
Live Action News is pro-life news and commentary from a pro-life perspective.
Our work is possible because of our donors. Please consider giving to further our work of changing hearts and minds on issues of life and human dignity.
Contact editor@liveaction.org for questions, corrections, or if you are seeking permission to reprint any Live Action News content.
Guest Articles: To submit a guest article to Live Action News, email editor@liveaction.org with an attached Word document of 800-1000 words. Please also attach any photos relevant to your submission if applicable. If your submission is accepted for publication, you will be notified within three weeks. Guest articles are not compensated (see our Open License Agreement). Thank you for your interest in Live Action News!
Kelli Keane
·
Analysis
Cassy Cooke
·
International
Cassy Cooke
·
Analysis
Cassy Cooke
·
Analysis
Nancy Flanders
·Analysis
Cassy Cooke
·International
Cassy Cooke
·
Politics
Cassy Cooke
·Analysis
Cassy Cooke
·Class-action lawsuit accuses Amazon of systemic pregnancy discrimination
A new lawsuit has alleged that Amazon routinely discriminates against current or previously pregnant employees.
A new lawsuit has been filed accusing Amazon of pregnancy discrimination.
Employees allege they were denied accommodations, such as the ability to take breaks or restrictions on how much weight they could lift.
Employees say that when they took time off due to pregnancy-related reasons, they were fired or threatened with termination.
A Better Balance, a non-profit organization dedicated to workers' rights, is representing pregnant Amazon employees who claim to have been discriminated against in violation of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA).
A nationwide class-action lawsuit has been filed, claiming that basic accommodations for pregnant employees were not provided, and that pregnant women who took time off relating to pregnancy were either fired or threatened with termination.
Amazon was previously the subject of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) complaints as well as multiple state investigations.
The stories of several plaintiffs were shared with USA Today.
38-year-old Willamina Barclay had previously suffered a miscarriage while at work, and had been diagnosed with another high-risk pregnancy.
She requested accommodations relating to her pregnancy, such as being allowed to remain seated, take extra breaks, no repetitive squatting, no climbing ladders, and a 15-pound weight limit on lifting items. Some of those accommodations were denied, and others were delayed, leading Barclay to experience severe abdominal pain while lifting heavy objects.
Her sister picked her up from work to go to the emergency room, and Barclay received a "Termination Warning Email" e-mail the next day. When she continued to be ill, she provided a doctor's note explaining she was experiencing pregnancy-related issues, and was fired four days later.
"I really don’t want pregnant women to experience the things that I’ve experienced at Amazon," she told USA Today. "I don’t want them to feel like they’re disposable."
Barclay was unemployed for months afterwards, saying she struggled to find a new job because she was visibly pregnant when she went to interviews, and as such, no one wanted to hire her.
Jennifer Hatch is another plaintiff, and previously shared her experience with the New York Times.
She wasn't pregnant when she was first hired, and had no problems with the physical aspects of the job, like remaining standing for long periods of time. But several months later, when she got pregnant, that changed.
Her asthma worsened, and she experienced abdominal pain if she stood for too long. Her doctor provided paperwork saying she should be allowed to sit throughout the day, but Amazon refused to comply.
At one point, she was struggling to breathe, and sat down, only for a supervisor to order her to stand again. She left work in an ambulance several times with abdominal pain, and in March of 2025, returned to work only to learn she had been fired, as her hospital visits had exceeded her total allotted time off by 90 minutes.
Meanwhile, she had been working part-time at a gas station, where her supervisors were incredibly accommodating of her pregnancy.
"The manager automatically had a chair behind the register ready for me," she told USA Today.
A third woman, Kristina Green, said she was fired for taking breaks to pump breast milk for her baby.
During her pregnancy, she had requested accommodations which, as with the other plaintiffs, were denied. She was allowed to take breaks throughout the day, but each one was deducted from her time-off balance.
Once she gave birth, she had access to a lactation room, but it was a 10-minute walk away, and her break time began as soon as she left her station.
"I tried not to spend a lot of time pumping because there was multiple times I got in trouble for taking too long," she told USA TODAY, and confirmed that she ultimately was fired.
Amazon has come under fire for pregnancy discrimination before.
Patty Hernandez said she requested a less strenuous role at Amazon when she got pregnant, which was denied. Hernandez ultimately suffered a miscarriage.
Four women at Amazon’s Oklahoma City fulfillment center alleged circumstances almost identical to Hernandez.
In 2019, CNET reviewed seven lawsuits against Amazon filed on behalf of pregnant women, reporting, “The requests [from the pregnant women] included longer bathroom breaks and fewer continuous hours on their feet… but in all of the cases the expectant mothers were fired after telling their managers they were pregnant. Six of the cases were settled out of court.”
Unfortunately, Amazon is far from alone.
Pregnancy discrimination is alarmingly common across the country, with former employees of Walmart, Google, Walgreens, UPS, Nike, and many other corporations accusing the companies of pregnancy discrimination or mistreatment.
Yet instead of acknowledging this issue, many companies began offering female employees abortion benefits instead of providing truly family-friendly work environments, which then implicitly pressures women to choose between their careers and their children.
Pregnancy discrimination is a serious issue that too often goes unacknowledged.
Women deserve the ability to have a meaningful career without having to fear that a pregnancy will lead to discrimination or termination from their jobs.
Live Action News is pro-life news and commentary from a pro-life perspective.
Our work is possible because of our donors. Please consider giving to further our work of changing hearts and minds on issues of life and human dignity.
Contact editor@liveaction.org for questions, corrections, or if you are seeking permission to reprint any Live Action News content.
Guest Articles: To submit a guest article to Live Action News, email editor@liveaction.org with an attached Word document of 800-1000 words. Please also attach any photos relevant to your submission if applicable. If your submission is accepted for publication, you will be notified within three weeks. Guest articles are not compensated (see our Open License Agreement). Thank you for your interest in Live Action News!
Kelli Keane
·Analysis
Cassy Cooke
·International
Cassy Cooke
·Analysis
Cassy Cooke
·Analysis
Nancy Flanders
·Analysis
Cassy Cooke
·International
Cassy Cooke
·Politics
Cassy Cooke
·Analysis
Cassy Cooke
·