Boston Globe Turns to Philip Gordon for Comment on Amazon’s Employment Practices

Boston Globe recently sought expert legal commentary from Philip Gordon of Gordon LLP, in connection with scrutiny around Amazon’s driver background check employment policy and screening fairness for last-mile delivery contractors and employees.

The article examined how background check policies impact delivery drivers who interact with customers, operate fleet vehicles, and are responsible for time-sensitive delivery logistics. Because these drivers are often the public-facing extension of organizational workforce policy, the fairness of employment screening practices becomes not only a legal compliance question, but one of public institutional accountability.

What the Article Raised

Key employment screening concerns covered by Boston Globe include:

• Whether driver background checks apply consistent fairness standards
• How criminal history screening intersects with state anti-discrimination laws
• Retaliation risk when applicants challenge screening process fairness
• Lack of transparency in driver qualification governance architecture
• Differences between contractor and employee screening thresholds
• How screening outcomes affect workforce access and economic mobility

Why Background Checks for Drivers are Complex

Unlike traditional office hiring frameworks, driver screening policies operate within broader overlapping legal and regulatory ecosystems:

1. State anti-discrimination screening limits — many states restrict blanket criminal history exclusion unless directly related to job duties.
2. Federal wage & classification implications — drivers labeled as contractors may still be analyzed under employee rights tests, depending on control and dependency structures.
3. Transportation risk governance — drivers operate vehicles, requiring safety-risk justification frameworks that are defensible and documented.
4. Public fairness perception — because delivery drivers represent brands directly to the public, fairness failures become public institutional reputation liabilities.

The ADEA does not directly impact drivers based on age, but screening bias may still implicate protected-class frameworks like race, disability, national origin, or criminal history safeguards under municipal employment law.

Insights from Philip Gordon

Philip Gordon provided commentary focusing on how employers must balance:

• The necessity of safety justification for drivers transporting goods
• Procedural fairness and lawful screening burden shifting
• Potential gaps in screening governance documentation chains
• Ensuring background-check policies don’t produce discriminatory outcomes
• How to structure defensible hiring screening governance evidence
• Liability stacking risk when screening policy reasoning fails

Because Amazon drivers deliver both private and commercial goods, regulators and courts increasingly evaluate background check opacity risks, subcontracting liability diffusion, driver civil-rights protection intersections, and policy justification durability.

(View Article)

We’ve also posted this on Facebook (here), if you’d like to interact with us there.