[JumpCrisscross]

> makes me suspicious that this isn't a good faith worker protection law but rather specifically targeted at Amazon

It seems to target Amazon, but for good reasons [1].

The law’s principal mode of enforcement is private [2]. This fine appears to be more the state laying a trail of breadcrumbs for private attorneys to follow than the last word on the matter.

> why is it allowed for all other industries?

Defining what constitutes a quota is hard. If there isn’t evidence of abuse in other settings, it doesn’t make sense to expand the regulatory burden for the hell of it.

[1] https://www.schneiderwallace.com/media/california-new-york-a...

[2] https://www.californiaemploymentlawreport.com/2021/09/califo...

[fallingknife]

They have a good reason for targeting the practice. They do not have a good reason for targeting Amazon in particular.

And I suspect the good reason you mean is this:

> Quotas must also be limited to not prevent workers from taking rest breaks, meal breaks, bathrooms breaks, or prevent compliance with health and safety standards.

Amazon is not being accused of doing this here. They are being fined for keeping the quota secret, not for the quota itself.

[JumpCrisscross]

> do not have a good reason for targeting Amazon in particular

The law applies to all warehouses.