Judge rejects Amazon attempt to dismiss gender pay disparity class action

SEATTLE (CN) — A class action by Amazon employees claiming the e-commerce giant “underpays and discriminates against its female employees on a systemic scale” will proceed after a federal judge rejected Amazon’s effort to dismiss the suit on Thursday.

“The court finds that Amazon’s motion is premature, as it cannot say from the pleadings alone that plaintiffs’ case is so hopeless as a class or collective action that it must be dismissed at the start,” U.S. District Judge Jamal N. Whitehead wrote in a 19-page order.

Caroline Wilmuth, Erin Combs and Katherine Schomer sued Amazon in 2023, accusing the company of applying “job codes” and “job levels” to its employees and then illegally paying women less than men performing the same job code or level.

The women accuse the e-commerce giant of violating federal and state equal pay protection laws, as well as individually retaliating against them for taking protected leave.

“For more than a year, we proactively tried to find a resolution to the pay and treatment issues that we experienced but Amazon didn’t seem to take its problems seriously. Filing a lawsuit was our last resort,” Combs said in a statement.

The proposed class includes women who worked for Amazon in certain job levels for any amount of time in the last three years before the filing or resolution of the lawsuit.

Amazon argued that the proposed class is overbroad and too unwieldy to sustain a class action.

Whitehead characterized the company’s arguments as relying on facts outside of the complaint and said they “ask the court to draw inferences in Amazon’s favor.”

For instance, Whitehead noted the company argued the women failed to assert they were united victims of a single decision, plan or policy, yet their complaint contains “detailed factual allegations about Amazon’s uniform and mandatory policies.”

“Amazon acknowledges these allegations even as it discounts plaintiffs’ claims, which the court views as a not-so-silent admission that striking plaintiffs’ collective action allegations would be improper,” Whitehead wrote.

The company also argued the class action is precluded under the Federal Equal Pay Act’s “single establishment” rule and that claims must be limited to employees working at a single location.

Whitehead rejected this argument as well, noting that courts interpret the term functionally to mean a company with a central administrative unit rather than geographically.

After filing the initial complaint, the Amazon workers claim Amazon discriminated and retaliated against them individually. Combs, who joined the company in 2020 in the marketing and communications department, claims Amazon essentially demoted her when she returned from protected leave. Schomer, hired in 2019 as the head of market intelligence for executive recruiting, says she was placed on a performance improvement plan upon her return from protected leave, which rendered her ineligible for a raise or stock grant.

Amazon only targeted Wilmuth’s protected leave violation claims, asking Whitehead to toss the claims because she only asserted an interference claim rather than retaliation.

Wilmuth, who worked for Amazon as a general marketing manager since 2017, took a month of protected Family and Medical Leave Act medical leave in early 2023 to deal with mental health problems arising from discrimination at work, according to the amended complaint.

Wilmuth later took approved short-term disability leave one month after filing the lawsuit. Two weeks later, while still on leave, Amazon fired her, according to the complaint.

Amazon argued too much time had passed between when she took protected leave and when she was fired for the two to be linked. Whitehead found Wilmuth supplied facts accusing the company of retaliating against her use of protected leave for months until she was ultimately fired.

“Dr. Wilmuth has plainly stated a plausible claim; that Amazon thinks little of its merits is not enough to justify dismissal,” Whitehead wrote.

The plaintiffs called Whitehead’s ruling a step in the right direction.

“The judge’s ruling is deeply validating and I am grateful for the opportunity to have our voices heard,” Wilmuth said. “Since filing this lawsuit, my conviction that it was the right thing to do has only strengthened — not just for us, but for all the other women who have faced similar mistreatment.”