An Amazon warehouse worker claims she was fired four days after calling out sick because of a pregnancy-related condition, according to a new lawsuit against the company. Willamina Barclay is one of four former Amazon workers named in a proposed nationwide class action filed in federal court in Brooklyn, New York, on 8 September. The case accuses Amazon of failing to give some pregnant workers basic changes at work and then punishing them for taking needed breaks or time off.
The claims have not been proven in court, and Amazon disputes the workers' account. The company says it supports tens of thousands of workers with pregnancy needs each year and approved more than 99.9% of pregnancy-related requests in the past year. Amazon spokesperson Kelly Nantel said the stories shared by the workers' legal group 'contain inaccuracies and omit important details'.
Worker Says Pregnancy Emergency Led to Warning
Barclay, 38, worked at an Amazon warehouse in Rochester, New York, and said her doctor viewed her pregnancy as high-risk. According to the lawsuit, she had asked for changes including extra breaks, a seated job, no ladder climbing, no repeated squatting and a 15-pound lifting limit. The complaint says Amazon took too long to approve her request and later granted only some of the changes.
On 16 June 2025, Barclay said she developed severe stomach pain while lifting heavy items at work. She was taken out of the warehouse in a wheelchair, and her sister drove her to the hospital for what the lawsuit describes as a pregnancy-related medical emergency. The following day, Amazon sent her a warning saying she had used too much unpaid time off, according to the complaint.
When Barclay was next due at work, she called out sick and gave Amazon a doctor's note that day, the lawsuit says. The note explained that she was sick because of a pregnancy-related condition, according to the account provided in the case. Barclay claims Amazon fired her four days after that call-out, while the court timeline places her dismissal five days after the hospital visit.
Federal Law Protects Pregnant Workers
The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act took effect on 27 June 2023 and covers employers with at least 15 workers. It generally requires covered employers to make reasonable changes for known limits linked to pregnancy, childbirth or related medical conditions unless doing so would cause the business serious difficulty or cost. The law also bars covered employers from taking action against qualified workers because they asked for or used a reasonable change at work.
Federal guidance gives simple examples of changes that may be required. They can include more bathroom, food, water or rest breaks, a stool for a worker who needs to sit, lighter physical work and time off for medical visits. The guidance also says employers cannot always demand medical papers when the need for a basic change is clear.
The lawsuit asks for lost pay and benefits, damages and changes to Amazon's treatment of pregnant employees. Amazon, however, strongly rejects the picture presented in the case and says supporting employee health is one of its biggest duties. A court will now have to decide whether the workers' claims can move forward and whether Amazon broke federal or state law.
Amazon Defends Its Pregnancy Support
Amazon says its record shows that pregnancy requests are usually approved. Nantel said the company works to provide 'a safe and supportive environment for everyone' and supports tens of thousands of employees who need pregnancy changes each year. She added that when Amazon finds it has made a mistake, the company works to correct it.
The company also offers paid leave to eligible parents after or around the birth of a child. Amazon's current benefits information says eligible birthing parents can receive up to 20 weeks of fully paid leave, while eligible non-birthing and adoptive parents can receive six weeks. It also offers a Ramp-Back programme designed to help eligible parents slowly return to a full work schedule.
For Barclay, however, the case is about what happened before she gave birth. She gave birth in November 2025 after losing her Amazon job months earlier and has said she would still consider returning to the company because she liked the work and pay. Her allegations, together with those of the other three workers, will now face scrutiny as the proposed class action moves through federal court.
