The Lawsuit That Could Finally Force Amazon to Pay Warehouse Workers for Every Minute They Work

A recent lawsuit against Amazon has a strangely familiar feel to it. It was filed in a federal court in Denver last October, and it has the kind of quiet weight that labor cases occasionally have before anyone outside the legal press notices them. During the peak of the pandemic, Jennifer Vincenzetti, the plaintiff, was employed at one of Amazon’s Colorado warehouses. Her grievance is straightforward in wording but more pointed in meaning. She claims that before she and thousands of her coworkers could clock in, they had to wait in line for COVID health screenings at Amazon. Twenty minutes, or even an hour at times. On-site, on duty, and technically unemployed.

Here, it’s difficult to ignore the pattern. Minutes ago, Amazon was sued. A similar battle was brought before the Supreme Court years ago by Nevada warehouse workers who claimed they should be compensated for the time they spent in security screening lines at the conclusion of their shifts.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the screenings weren’t actually a part of the workers’ primary job, and the Court unanimously disagreed. On paper, the logic seemed sound, but in reality, it seemed odd. The minutes don’t feel optional, as anyone who has shifted weight from one foot to another while standing in a warehouse line will attest.

The framing of the Vincenzetti complaint is what makes it intriguing. This is not a case for a metal detector. This is an instance of a pandemic. In an actual emergency, COVID screenings were marketed to the public as a safeguard and an act of corporate responsibility. The complaint makes the more cynical claim that Amazon sought to appear as though it was protecting its employees while shifting the expense of doing so onto them.

There’s a feeling that courts might have a different perspective on required health procedures than they do on theft-prevention searches. This distinction gives this case a different feel than the Nevada one, though it’s still unclear if it will stand up in court.

At shift change, you can witness the tangible reality of all of this outside an Amazon fulfillment center. Employees in company vests and lanyards, with water bottles tucked under their arms, approached the entrance point slowly. Some people use their phones to scroll. Some people don’t care. Like a timecard, the line is a normal part of the day. It has never really been about the minutes themselves whether or not those minutes qualify as work. It has been about who bears the expense.

The complaint was likely filed in Colorado rather than elsewhere because Colorado’s wage laws are more stringent than federal ones. Investors seem to think that these cases don’t often hurt Amazon’s bottom line, and they’ve been correct in the past. However, the damages calculation is not simple, and the class, if certified, may comprise thousands of workers. Compared to the regular filings, labor attorneys have been keeping a closer eye on this docket.

This type of heat has been experienced by Amazon in the past, and it has generally been absorbed. Because of the company’s size, individual grievances seem insignificant. However, the pressure has been building piece by piece, sometimes surprising those who thought the legal framework was set in stone. As this develops, there’s a sense that the previous Busk precedent might not apply to all future variations, particularly those resulting from a pandemic for which no one was ready.

It’s another matter entirely if a Denver court concurs. For the time being, Jennifer Vincenzetti’s name is on a complaint that has the potential to subtly change how the biggest employer in American warehousing counts minutes if certain conditions are met.