By ALEXANDRA OLSON and CLAIRE SAVAGE, Related Press
NEW YORK (AP) — A former Amazon supply driver has filed a lawsuit accusing a federal civil proper company of abruptly and unlawfully abandoning her intercourse discrimination case and others prefer it following an government order from President Donald Trump.
The lawsuit filed by the previous Colorado driver calls for that the Equal Employment Alternative Fee resume investigating her claims that Amazon discriminates in opposition to feminine drivers by failing to offer ample toilet breaks.
The lawsuit is the newest instance of employees and others scrambling to search out recourse as federal agencies abandon their cases in response to Trump’s shake-up of the nation’s civil rights enforcement infrastructure.
The EEOC, which enforces civil rights legal guidelines within the office, determined final month to discharge any complaints primarily based on “disparate impact liability,” which holds that insurance policies which are impartial on their face might be discriminatory in the event that they impose pointless boundaries that drawback totally different demographic teams.
The EEOC’s choice got here in response to an government order in April directing federal companies to deprioritize the usage of disparate affect legal responsibility. The Trump administration argues that disparate affect assumes any racial or gender imbalance in workplaces is the results of discrimination and results in practices that undermine meritocracy.
The previous driver, Leah Cross, filed a movement Tuesday asking the U.S. District Court docket for the District of Columbia to remain the EEOC’s new rule prohibiting investigations and enjoin the company from implementing it.
The EEOC has already dropped its sole lawsuit arising from a disparate affect legal responsibility cost, a case alleging that the Sheetz comfort retailer chain’s background verify practices discriminated in opposition to Black, Native American and multiracial job candidates.
Individually, the company has dropped lawsuits on behalf of transgender workers and subjected new complaints to a better stage of scrutiny, following Trump’s government order declaring that the federal government would solely acknowledge two unchangeable sexes.
It’s unclear what number of employee complaints involving disparate affect legal responsibility or LGBTQ+ employees have been sidelined by the EEOC. In her lawsuit, Cross demanded that the EEOC, which dealt with greater than 88,000 discrimination costs in 2024, give the court docket an inventory of the disparate affect legal responsibility costs it has shut down.
The EEOC referred questions in regards to the lawsuit to the Division of Justice, which declined to remark.
Cross, who labored as a driver from August to November 2022, filed her EEOC cost two years in the past, arguing that the corporate’s supply schedules make it almost not possible for drivers to search out time to make use of loos. An EEOC investigator informed her attorneys final month it was closing her case due to the disparate affect rule, in accordance with the lawsuit.
Amazon declined to touch upon Cross’ case however referred The AP to its insurance policies round its drivers, who ship packages in Amazon-branded automobiles however work not directly for the corporate by means of third-party corporations known as Supply Service Companions. Amazon says its know-how builds routes that guarantee time for 2 15-minute relaxation breaks and a 30-minute meal break. The corporate additionally mentioned its Amazon Supply app gives an inventory for drivers to see close by restroom amenities and gasoline stations.
However in an interview with The AP, Cross mentioned it was so laborious for to her cease for breaks that she needed to pack a Shewee — a transportable urination machine for ladies — in addition to a change of pants “in case I ended up by accident urinating on myself.”
Cross’ lawsuit in opposition to the EEOC argues that the company is legally obligated to research all costs primarily based on disparate affect legal responsibility, which Congress codified within the 1991 Civil Rights Act.
The EEOC “isn’t allowed to throw away a whole class of costs with out wanting into their details simply because the president doesn’t like the kind of discrimination these costs are primarily based on,” mentioned Karla Gilbride, an legal professional at Public Citizen Litigation Group, one of many organizations that filed the lawsuit.
Gilbride was the EEOC’s basic counsel till she was fired in January together with two Democratic commissioners in a purge that cleared the way for the Trump administration to root out range and inclusion applications, roll again protections for transgender employees and elevate non secular rights.
The Related Press’ girls within the workforce and state authorities protection receives monetary help from Pivotal Ventures. AP is solely accountable for all content material. Discover AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, an inventory of supporters and funded protection areas at AP.org.
Initially Printed:
