Amazon Faces Class Action Over ‘Punitive’ Absence Policy for Disabled Workers

Amazon.com, the second-largest private employer in the United States, is facing fresh scrutiny after being accused of punishing warehouse employees who request accommodations for disabilities. A proposed class-action lawsuit filed in New York on Wednesday alleges that the company’s attendance policy intimidates workers and places their jobs at risk when they take legally protected medical leave.

The case, led by warehouse employee Cayla Lyster, claims Amazon’s “punitive absence control system” counts time off ordered by the company itself as unexcused absences — a practice that could lead to termination. Lyster, who works at an Amazon facility near Syracuse, New York, said she suffers from Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, a connective tissue disorder, and that the company repeatedly forced her onto unpaid leave while reviewing her accommodation requests.

“Amazon’s practices chill employees’ exercise of their legal rights,” the complaint says. “Workers fear they will be disciplined or fired if they request reasonable accommodation.”

The lawsuit was filed in the Southern District of New York and seeks damages for all hourly warehouse workers in the state who requested or intended to request disability-related accommodations over the past three years. It comes amid a growing wave of legal challenges to Amazon’s management systems and their impact on workers’ physical and mental well-being.

Allegations of Intimidation

According to the complaint, Amazon’s internal policy automatically docks unpaid time off when workers are required to stay home due to medical reviews, even if the absence was mandated by the company. Employees reportedly receive automated emails demanding justification for their absences within 48 hours or face termination.

Lyster said she was left without pay for nearly six weeks while Amazon considered her request for basic accommodations, such as a chair and relief from climbing ladders. Supervisors, she added, “berated her for seeking help.”

The lawsuit argues that these actions amount to retaliation against workers who assert their rights under disability law. Advocates say the case highlights the broader question of how major corporations balance operational efficiency with employee welfare.

“Workers shouldn’t ever need to choose between their safety and their paycheck,” said Inimai Chettiar, president of A Better Balance, a nonprofit workplace advocacy group supporting the suit.

Growing Legal Pressure

This is not the first time Amazon has faced accusations of mishandling accommodation requests. In October, the New Jersey Attorney General, Matthew Platkin, filed a separate lawsuit claiming Amazon repeatedly placed pregnant workers and employees with disabilities on unpaid leave rather than granting them modified duties or schedules.

Amazon has denied those allegations, saying it approves “more than 99% of pregnancy-related accommodation requests” and follows federal and state laws. The company declined to comment on the new class-action filing.

The two cases underscore a broader reassessment of labor standards at Amazon, which employs more than 1.5 million people worldwide. The company has faced union drives, investigations into injury rates, and federal scrutiny over warehouse productivity systems that critics say prioritize speed over safety.

Corporate and Market Implications

For investors, the case adds another layer of risk to Amazon’s public image at a time when it faces slowing e-commerce growth and greater political attention. The retailer has been expanding its logistics network while automating more of its warehouse operations — a process that, according to labor experts, may be intensifying strain on workers.

Legal analysts say the outcome of this case could set a precedent for how major U.S. employers are held accountable for the intersection of disability rights and workplace automation. If the plaintiffs succeed in certifying a class, the lawsuit could expose Amazon to significant reputational and financial costs, while prompting a broader industry reckoning.

For now, the complaint captures a familiar paradox of modern corporate America: a company at the cutting edge of technology and logistics accused of neglecting the human realities behind its success.