New York Attorney General Letitia James sued Amazon on Tuesday night, arguing that during the pandemic, the company provided inadequate safety protection for New York City workers and retaliated against employees who expressed concern about the circumstances.
The case focuses on two Amazon facilities: a large warehouse on Staten Island and a delivery depot in Queens. Me. James alleges that Amazon failed to clean its buildings properly, did insufficient contact detection for well-known Covid-19 cases, and “quickly retaliated” to silence complaints from workers.
“Amazon’s extreme profit and exponential growth rate has claimed at the expense of the lives, health and safety of its frontline workers,” she said. James in the complaint, which was filed at the New York High Court, argued.
Amazon spokeswoman Kelly Nantel said the company “cares deeply about the health and safety” of its workers.
“We do not believe the Attorney General’s submission provides an accurate picture of Amazon’s leading response to the pandemic,” she said. Nantel said.
Last week, Amazon me. James is currently being sued in federal court in an attempt to stop her from filing the charges. The company argued that workplace safety is a matter of federal, not state law.
Amazon said in its 64-page complaint last week that its security measures “are far greater than what is required by law.” It calls for a surprise inspection by the sheriff of New York City, who found that Amazon “meets more than current requirements.” The company also outlined other safety measures it has taken, including temperature controls and free on-site Covid-19 testing.
New York said in its lawsuit that Amazon had received written notice from at least 250 employees at the Staten Island warehouse that had Covid-19. In more than 90 of the cases, the infected employee was at work the previous week, but Amazon did not close parts of the building to provide proper ventilation as required by the state.
Mrs. James said that until at least the end of June, Amazon did not conduct interviews with infected workers to determine their close contacts, but rather on the review of surveillance materials, which can take three days and which do not cover the entire warehouse. The lack of interviews ‘created a very time-consuming process that did not identify close contacts in a timely manner,’ the complaint reads.
She also argued that Amazon took revenge on Christian Smalls, a worker who fired the company in the spring. Mr. Smalls expressed concern about the safety of drivers and led a public demonstration in the parking lot of the Staten Island plant.
Amazon said Mr. Smalls was fired because he went to the workplace for the protest, even though he was on paid quarantine leave after being exposed to a colleague who tested positive for the coronavirus.
According to James, two employees of Amazon’s human resources discussed in writing. According to the employees, it is unfair to fire him because he did not enter the building and because Amazon did not tell him that the company’s quarantine policy prohibits being outside the building.
Me. James said that Amazon sent a cool message to others through Mr. Dismiss Smalls and reprimand another protest leader.
“Amazon employees are pretty afraid that Amazon will also take revenge on them if they make legal health and safety complaints about Amazon’s Covid-19 response,” she argued.
The state said that Amazon should change its policy, conduct training and undergo safety monitoring, and that it should pay lost wages and other damages to Mr. Smalls has to pay and give him his job back.