Nearly seven years with no discipline - then a termination before FMLA leave kicked in
A former Amazon HR manager has accused the company of firing her four days before her approved mental health leave.
The plaintiff, who identifies as Black/African American, filed a federal complaint against Amazon.com Services LLC on September 11, 2026, in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The complaint brings claims of race discrimination, a hostile work environment, and retaliation under the Family and Medical Leave Act, alleging months of targeting that ended with her termination.
The plaintiff worked at Amazon for nearly seven years beginning in 2019, according to the filing, climbing from Senior HR Assistant through a series of promotions to Regional HR Manager. The complaint states her total annual compensation at the time of her termination was approximately $210,000, including a base salary of approximately $158,000 and restricted stock units.
Across that entire stretch, the complaint alleges, she never received a performance rating below "meets expectations," was never placed on probation, and never received any reprimand, write-up, or discipline of any kind.
The filing states the trouble started in or around September 2025. A colleague serving as a regional HR manager and acting director allegedly disparaged the organization the plaintiff had previously worked in, repeatedly drawing unfavorable comparisons. The complaint says these comments left the plaintiff feeling her professional experience was not valued and that she was "unwelcome and unsafe in the workplace."
From September 2025 through June 2026, according to the complaint, the plaintiff documented multiple instances of adverse treatment and reported them to her direct manager. The filing alleges the manager noted her concerns in writing but never took action, never escalated them to an investigator, and never initiated or caused any investigation.
In April 2026, the complaint states, the plaintiff received a Final Written Warning for allegedly mishandling an investigation - her first disciplinary issue of any kind in nearly seven years. The filing describes this as inconsistent with the company's standard progressive-discipline practice, particularly for a high-performing leader. In connection with the same matter, the complaint states, the hourly employee at the center of the investigation was reinstated, and her manager also received a write-up. According to the filing, the manager told the plaintiff he had received that write-up "because of" her.
After the April 2026 warning, the complaint alleges, the manager scrutinized her work at a significantly heightened level. The filing states he repeatedly reminded her he "got written up because of you" and told her she needed to be on her "p's and q's."
In or around May 2026, the complaint says, the plaintiff broke down in tears during a one-on-one meeting and told her manager she was not in a good place mentally and needed to take a leave of absence. According to the filing, the manager said he would support whatever she needed to do.
Approximately 83 days after the April warning, the complaint states, an HR partner who reported to the plaintiff conducted an investigation, and she approved a first written warning for an employee following a prior documented coaching for the same violation. The filing describes this as consistent with the proper disciplinary progression. But because the warning was approved before a second confirming interview had taken place - something the complaint says the manager himself characterized as "a technicality that would not have changed the findings" - the manager escalated her for termination review.
The complaint alleges Amazon treated the plaintiff less favorably than white peers who committed comparable or more serious errors under the same manager. According to the filing, a white female peer and that peer's white male direct report missed a required termination step and issued only a final written warning to an employee who should have been terminated, exposing the company to risk. Neither faced any discipline. Separately, the complaint states, a white male employee who reported directly to the plaintiff had recently completed a formal performance improvement plan and, less than 30 days later, made what the filing calls a significant standard-work error by advising an operator to verbally terminate an employee whose termination had not been approved. According to the complaint, the manager agreed this employee should receive only coaching.
On June 26, 2026, the filing states, the plaintiff formally submitted an FMLA leave request, initially covering July 6 through August 2, 2026, later extended through September 4, 2026 following review by her psychiatrist. The complaint describes this as a 60-day, fully paid leave of absence that was approved in the company's system before her termination.
Three days later, on June 29, the complaint says, the plaintiff messaged her manager about the leave request. According to the filing, he did not respond through company channels but instead placed a last-minute "escalation review" call on her calendar - despite having already submitted her for termination review.
On July 2, 2026, at approximately 3:30 p.m. Eastern, the complaint states, the plaintiff’s manager terminated her on the last call of the day before the July 4 holiday - four days before her approved leave was set to begin on July 6. According to the filing, she was told: "As discussed, a subsequent violation of the same protocols referenced in your Final Written Warning (FWW) has been identified. Because this represents a continuation of the performance gap outlined in your FWW, your employment has been terminated effective immediately." The complaint states no paperwork was signed and no severance or separation offer was made.
After her termination, according to the filing, the plaintiff emailed her senior vice president with what she described as a formal complaint of retaliation, targeting, and wrongful termination, requesting an internal investigation. The complaint states she received no response.
The complaint brings six counts: race discrimination and hostile work environment under 42 U.S.C. Section 1981, race discrimination and hostile work environment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and FMLA interference and retaliation under 29 U.S.C. Section 2615. The filing also references Chapter 760 of the Florida Statutes.
According to the complaint, the plaintiff filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC and the Florida Commission on Human Relations on July 23, 2026 (EEOC Charge No. 510-2026-10939) and received her right-to-sue notice on August 29, 2026.
The plaintiff alleges she has suffered lost wages and benefits, the loss of her approved 60-day fully paid leave, the loss of unvested restricted stock units, damage to her professional reputation, and significant emotional distress. The complaint states she remains unemployed and has been applying for positions that pay substantially less than what she earned at Amazon.
The allegations in the complaint have not been tested in court, and no judge has ruled on the claims.
