Amazon sued the New York Attorney General, Letitia James, on Friday to try to prevent her from bringing charges against the company over security concerns at its two warehouses in New York City.
The company also asked the court to force Ms. James to declare that she did not have the right to regulate workplace safety during the Kovid-19 epidemic or to investigate retaliatory allegations against employees who Resist working conditions.
In the case, filed in the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Amazon said Ms. James’s office was investigating epidemic safety concerns raised by staff at its large fulfillment center on Staten Island and a delivery depot in Queens. It said that Ms. James “threatened to sue” Amazon if it did not agree to its demands, which included subsidizing bus service, reducing worker productivity requirements, reducing profits and restoring. Christian smallAmazon, a worker, fired in the spring.
Mr Smalls has said that he was retaliated to lead the protest at the Staten Island warehouse. Amazon has said that he was fired for going to the work site for protesting, even though it was paid after he came in contact with a coworker.
Mr Small became the most visible case in the skirmishes between workers and Amazon, which faced an increase in orders from consumers who faced it. Epidemic form Spread across the country, many Amazon Workers said the company Missed the chance Providing better protection against Kovid-19.
Amazon has strongly defended its security measures and has become aggressive against its critics. In an internal meeting of senior executives, Amazon’s top lawyer Which Mr. Smalls called the beginning And discussed strategies to make it the face of the mobilizer.
In its 64-page complaint, Amazon stated its safety measures exceeded “what is required under the law,” and argued that federal law, not state law enforced by the New York Attorney General, would address workplace safety concerns. Was the primary inspection for
The company said, “OAG lacks legal authority due to which it gives permission against Amazon.”
Amazon declined to comment beyond the filing.
Ms. James said in a statement, “The failure to protect hardworking employees from a deadly virus was nothing more than a distraction from the facts and a tragic attempt to make up for their failures.”
She said that her office was reviewing her legal options. “Let me be clear: We will not be intimidated by anyone, especially corporate bullies who have an advantage over the health and safety of working people,” he said.
James Brudney, a labor law professor at Ford Brahm University, said it was unusual for companies to file a lawsuit anticipating a “scorched earth” that Amazon had.
“They want to fight,” he said of Amazon. “They always want to fight.”
Mr. Brudney said federal law precedes state workplace safety enforcement in many cases, although there are exceptions that Ms. James can argue.
“It would be appropriate to see if the state can prove its case,” he said. He said the federal oversight epidemic was “badly and tragically failed” to create and enforce workplace safety, so states have stepped in to address the gaps.
Most of Amazon’s complaints detail its epidemic response, including temperature checks at the entrance, providing masks, and offering a free trial site. It added that, by its calculation, 1.15 percent of New York frontline employees had tested positive or had estimated positive for coronavirus, a rate nearly half that for the general population in the state.
On March 30 of the New York City Sheriff Office documenting an unannounced inspection of the Staten Island warehouse, a complaint was also filed stating that Amazon “appeared to go above and beyond current compliance requirements.”