Virginia Court Rejects Amazon’s Appeal in Employee Classification Case

Court rules that Amazon Flex drivers are employees, not contractors for unemployment tax purposes.
By: | March 11, 2025
gig driver

The Supreme Court of Virginia has affirmed a lower court ruling that Amazon Flex delivery drivers are employees rather than independent contractors for unemployment compensation purposes.

In a significant procedural decision, the court ruled in Amazon Logistics Inc. vs. Virginia Employment Commission that Amazon Logistics Inc. waived its arguments by taking contradictory positions during litigation and failing to properly support its claims on appeal. The case highlights the ongoing challenges companies face when classifying workers in the gig economy and the potential unemployment insurance tax liabilities that may result.

Amazon Flex is an app-based program where participants sign up as delivery drivers for 3-to-4-hour time blocks using their own vehicles to deliver Amazon packages. The case originated when Donald A. Diggs, who had worked as a Flex driver before transitioning to an Amazon warehouse position, filed an unemployment benefits claim. After investigating, the Virginia Employment Commission determined that Diggs and “similarly engaged” Flex drivers were Amazon employees, making Amazon liable for unemployment taxes.

Amazon appealed this determination under Section 60.2-500 of the Virginia Code, which addresses employer tax liability. Throughout the initial proceedings, Amazon sought a class-wide ruling that all Flex drivers should be classified as independent contractors. The company presented evidence including an unsigned Amazon Flex contract and testimony from a senior manager that the terms applied equally to all Flex drivers.

The Commission, however, concluded that Amazon exerted significant control over its Flex drivers and classified them as employees, ordering Amazon to pay unemployment taxes for all misclassified drivers.

After losing appeals at both the circuit court and Court of Appeals levels, Amazon shifted its strategy. The company argued that the Commission lacked sufficient evidence to make a class-wide determination and that it had improperly expanded an individual benefits case into an employer tax liability proceeding. Amazon also raised due process concerns and argued that statutory changes affected the classification standard.

The Supreme Court of Virginia declined to reach the merits of the case, instead focusing on procedural issues. The court noted that Amazon’s brief failed to develop adequate arguments supporting its assignment of error regarding insufficient evidence. As the court stated, “Amazon’s allegations against the Commission are unrelated to the claims of insufficient evidence.” More significantly, the court found that Amazon violated the approbate-reprobate doctrine by changing its position.

“Amazon not only participated in a Section 60.2-500 process, it affirmatively sought a class-wide ruling from the Commission…After losing before the Commission, Amazon tried to retroactively pivot away from its strategy,” the court wrote, adding that “such a contradictory shift in position to mitigate self-inflicted wounds violates the approbate-reprobate doctrine.”

The Supreme Court of Virginia’s ruling means that Amazon must continue treating its Flex drivers as employees for unemployment insurance purposes, with corresponding tax obligations. However, the court specifically noted the narrow application of its decision, acknowledging that changes in the law or contractual terms could lead to different outcomes in future cases.

View the full decision here. &

The R&I Editorial Team can be reached at [email protected].

More from Risk & Insurance