Amazon's hard-line stance on
At least two employees have filed complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the National Labor Relations Board, federal agencies that
Disabled workers frustrated with how Amazon is handling their requests for accommodations — including exemptions to a mandate that they report to the office five days a week — are also venting their displeasure on internal chat rooms and have encouraged colleagues to answer surveys about the policies.
Amazon has been deleting such posts and warning that they violate rules governing internal communications. One employee said they were terminated and another said they were told to find a different position after advocating for disabled workers on employee message boards. Both filed complaints with the EEOC and NLRB.
The company's use of artificial intelligence to help it manage employee requests for disability accommodations has also stirred internal opposition and could open the company to legal challenges.
Company spokesperson Zoe Hoffmann said Amazon's disability and leave services team ensures employees have access to the accommodations and adjustments they need to be effective and advance their careers. The process is empathetic, and the interactions aren't automated, she said.
"Amazon respects employees' rights to organize and doesn't interfere with these rights. We don't discriminate or retaliate against employees for engaging in organizing activities," Hoffmann said in an emailed statement. "We're committed to supporting our employees by providing effective accommodations that meet their individual needs and the needs of the business."
Read more:
Bloomberg reported in November that Amazon was making it more difficult for staff with disabilities to win approval to work from home. The company implemented a more rigorous vetting process, both for new requests to work remotely and applications to extend existing arrangements. Affected employees had to participate in a "multilevel leader review" and some were told monthlong trials would be used to determine if accommodations met their needs.
Several employees said then that they believed the system was designed to deny work-from-home accommodations and prompt employees with disabilities to quit, which some have done. Amazon denied the system was designed to encourage people to resign.
Since then, workers have mobilized against the policy. One employee repeatedly posted an online survey seeking colleagues' reactions, defying the company's demands to stop. The survey ultimately generated feedback from more than 200 workers even though Amazon kept deleting it, and the results reflected strong opposition to Amazon's treatment of disabled workers.
More than 71% of disabled Amazon employees surveyed said the company had denied or failed to meet most of their accommodation requests, while half indicated they faced "hostile" work environments after disclosing their disabilities and requesting accommodations.
One respondent said they sought permission to work from home after suffering multiple strokes that prevented them from driving. Amazon suggested moving closer to the office and taking mass transit, the person said in the survey. Another respondent said they couldn't drive for longer than 15-minute intervals due to chronic pain. Amazon's recommendation was to pull over and stretch during their commute, which the employee said was unsafe since they have to drive on a busy freeway.
Bloomberg couldn't verify the responses to the anonymous employee survey. Amazon didn't dispute the accounts and said it considered a range of solutions to disability accommodations, including changes to an employee's commute.
Hoffmann, the spokesperson, said that when appropriate, Amazon adjusts schedules, lighting and desk assignments. It also offers job coaching. If warranted, the company might provide commuting adjustments. In rare circumstances, she said, employees with disabilities are allowed to work from home full time or part time.
AI risks
Using AI to parse accommodation requests, read doctors' notes and make recommendations based on keywords has also generated internal opposition. Bloomberg reviewed screenshots from an in-house coding tool showing what appeared to be prompts designed to guide AI software through the process of evaluating and pulling data from documents filled out by employees and their physicians.
The bots are given context — such as the fact that injuries can occur on one or both arms — suggestions of follow-up questions and a lengthy list of potential accommodations for employees with low vision. There's also extensive guidance that may be intended to keep the software from asking unnecessary questions or generating irrelevant data.
Amazon has long used automation to more efficiently manage its enormous workforce. But deploying such tools for sensitive personnel matters risks missing nuances about an employee's situation that a human might spot and take into consideration. Doing so also could lead to legal complications should employees claim the software introduced errors into the process. And the use of AI risks further alienating employees, who are already expected to engage with chatbots and automated systems, rather than colleagues, for a wide range of workplace tasks.
"It's impossible to imagine that companies will not be using AI for any number of needs, including this one," said Chai Feldblum, a former commissioner with the EEOC. But in the event of a legal challenge, she said, Amazon would have to prove that providing an accommodation to an employee placed an unreasonable burden on the company. "I would not leave that final judgment to AI," Feldblum said.
Read more:
Amazon's partly automated accommodation and internal job transfer processes are key elements of the employee complaints to the EEOC, with workers arguing that it is insufficiently interactive to provide a complete picture of a person's physical limitations and whether reasonable accommodations could help them do their jobs.
"If there's an indication that Amazon is using some rote artificial intelligence process to manage these requests, that's not interactive," said David Hutt, legal director of the National Disability Rights Network. "Courts are pretty skeptical of these kinds of boilerplate accommodations that aren't specifically tailored around the person's disability and their job function."
Two employees said Amazon cited its "solicitation" policy when deleting their posts from employee communication channels. The policy prohibits personnel from asking others for financial contributions, disseminating advertising materials or gathering signatures on petitions unless they have permission from the company, according to documents reviewed by Bloomberg.
Preventing employees from discussing the workplace could backfire if the NLRB determines that doing so interferes with their protected rights to organize and debate working conditions, said Kate Bronfenbrenner, the director of labor education research at Cornell University. "If two or more people are in any way penalized or coerced against exercising their rights, it's a violation," Bronfenbrenner said. "Whether this gets enforced is another question," she added, citing budget cuts to various federal agencies.
With internal communication channels being scrutinized, Amazon employees posted a petition to Change.org calling on the company to reform its policies.
Read more:
The dispute could affect thousands of Amazon workers. An internal Slack channel for employees with disabilities has 13,000 members, one of the people said. Amazon said it doesn't track the total number of disabled workers since employee disclosure is voluntary.
The rise of remote work during the pandemic helped boost the number of disabled people with jobs to almost 23% last year, close to a record high since the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics began tracking the metric in 2008. Working from home can benefit people with a range of disabilities, including chronic allergies, limited mobility and anxiety disorders.
Amazon employees have lodged complaints about workplace conditions in the past. The EEOC as recently as last year was investigating allegations that the company discriminated against pregnant warehouse workers in California, Connecticut, New Jersey and North Carolina by denying their accommodation requests. An agency spokesperson declined to provide an update regarding the status of the investigation.
In 2021, Amazon settled a dispute with two workers at its Seattle headquarters who alleged they were fired in retaliation for their workplace activism regarding climate change and working conditions, which included inviting colleagues to a virtual event meant to connect tech employees with warehouse employees. Their allegations led to a labor board complaint accusing Amazon of unfair labor practices.
