Senate update alleges Amazon rejected warehouse safety recommendations due to productivity concerns

At least two internal Amazon studies found a link between how quickly the online retailer’s warehouse workers perform tasks and workplace injuries, but the corporation rejected many safety recommendations out of concern the proposed changes might reduce productivity, according to a U.S. Senate committee update.

The 160-page review issued Sunday night was compiled by the Democratic majority staff of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. The update is the final product of a probe into Amazon’s warehouse safety practices that U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders initiated last year.

The Vermont independent, a frequent critic of Amazon who chairs the panel, released an interim update in July that featured some findings from the investigation. The final update, which was mostly based on interviews with nearly 500 former and current Amazon workers, included more details, such as the two internal studies and the reactions they received inside the corporation.

Amazon pushed back on the findings Monday, saying in a blog post that Sanders “continues to mislead the American community” about the corporation’s safety practices and that the update was “incorrect on the facts and features selective, outdated information that lacks context and isn’t grounded in reality.”

The Senate update said Amazon launched an internal study in 2021 to determine the maximum number of times a warehouse worker could perform the same physical tasks without increased uncertainty of damage and potentially developing musculoskeletal disorders.

The throng conducting the Amazon study, known as assignment Elderwand, concentrated on workers who picked items from robotic shelf units. The study concluded that the “likelihood of back injury increases” along with the number of items picked and identified an upper limit on repetitive movements – 1,940 – per 10-hour shift, the update said.

The study recommended using software to implement breaks “according to each worker’s rate.” It suggested expanding an existing Amazon program that recommended “microbreaks” and making them mandatory for employees who worked above the maximum pace.

The throng stated that the achievement of a mini pilot program to test out its concept would be conditional on “any negative impact to the (workers) or customer encounter,” according to documents cited in the committee update.

Ultimately, Amazon did not make changes to reduce repetitive worker movements, the update said. The corporation told the Senate committee it chose not to do so due to “technical reasons” involving the proposed software program, the update said.

Amazon also said in its blog post that the assignment Elderwand pilot program showed the study throng’s suggested intervention was “ineffective.”

Amazon previously had undertaken another study, known as assignment Soteria, in 2020 to identify uncertainty factors for injuries and recommend policy changes that would enhance worker safety. The multi-throng initiative studied two policies Amazon implemented temporarily during the COVID-19 pandemic – giving workers more period off and pausing disciplinary measures “for workers who failed to meet speed requirements,” the update said.

The study found that both policies lowered injury risks and asked for their permanent adoption.

But corporation leaders denied the request, saying it might “negatively impact” productivity, according to Amazon documents cited in the Senate committee update. Amazon leaders also changed the focus of the assignment Soteria study by telling the people conducting the review to provide recommendations on how to enhance productivity without worsening worker injuries, the update said.

Amazon disputed the update’s characterization of the events.

“assignment Soteria is an example of this type of throng evaluation, where one throng explored whether there’s a causal link between pace of work and injuries and another throng evaluated the methodology and findings and determined they weren’t valid,” Amazon spokesperson Kelly Nantel said in a written statement.

Nantel also said that information about assignment Soteria was raised in a Washington state worker safety case in which Amazon was accused of four safety violations. A judge assigned to the case ruled in Amazon’s favor in July. Regulators are appealing the ruling.

“It’s unfortunate that the senator chose to ignore the facts and all of this context,” Nantel said.

The Senate committee update also alleged that Amazon manipulates its workplace injury data to portray its warehouses as safer than they are, an allegation the corporation disputed.

Amazon said it produced “thousands of pages of information and data” for the committee. The majority staff, however, said the corporation failed to produce documents on the connection between the pace of work and injuries.

The author’s of the committee update said they learned about the two internal studies from the Washington worker safety case, not Amazon. Once the committee staff members identified the studies by name, they reached out to the corporation, which ultimately provided the person documents.