People

Amazon’s non-compete agreement 'unfairly handcuffed' her: How one senior manager is pushing back

Charlotte Newman is still working for Amazon while suing the company for harassment and discrimination.

Amazon’s non-compete agreement 'unfairly handcuffed' her: How one senior manager is pushing back

Charlotte Newman is suing her employer, Amazon, alleging discrimination and harassment.

Photo: Tayo Kuku

"Too direct." "Too aggressive." "Scary."

A manager at Amazon called Charlotte Newman all of those things, Newman alleged in a recently-filed lawsuit against her employer. Her suit also alleged sexual assault from a manager as well as a systemic pattern of discrimination rooted in both sexism and racism.

Perhaps surprisingly, Newman has continued to work at Amazon during the legal process — partly because of a non-compete agreement she signed as part of the terms of her employment. Newman's non-compete agreement prohibits her from taking similar roles for 18 months upon leaving Amazon. Non-compete agreements are rare in Silicon Valley because California does not allow them to be enforced, but tech workers elsewhere can face them, and Amazon is known for its strict non-competes. A current piece of legislation, the Workforce Mobility Act, aims to limit the use of them nationwide.

In a conversation with Protocol, Newman spoke about the mistreatment she experienced at Amazon, her hopes for the Workforce Mobility Act and what she hopes to see from Amazon moving forward.

Down-leveling, harassment and demoralization

Newman first began working at Amazon in January 2017, after serving as the economic policy advisor to Senator Cory Booker for three years. Newman applied for a public policy senior manager position but was hired at a level below, the lawsuit states. Newman said she found herself doing the work of a senior-level manager within a few months of joining Amazon, without seeing any increase in pay or title.

During that time, Newman's manager, Steven Block, used racially-coded language to communicate with her, she said. The suit alleges Block said she was "too direct" and "too aggressive."

It really stung when he called her "scary," Newman told Protocol. "I went home and cried that day."

That was "particularly demoralizing," she said. At that point, it became clear that "he was not going to see me as a full human being."

Newman tried to have a conversation with Block about why calling her "scary" was problematic, she said, but he was not receptive to the feedback. She said she also experienced other types of microaggressions at work, such as when a white coworker suggested she take a photo with a Jambalaya wine bottle.

"There were also these moments where I think there was just a culture that was created where people felt emboldened to, or like they had permission to say and do things towards me that were, I think, motivated by bias in some way," she said. "It sort of recalled caricatures of Black people."

Newman said she also faced harassment from Andres Maz, a senior manager and later director of public policy for Amazon Web Services. Maz allegedly sexually assaulted Newman during a work dinner, in which he groped her upper thigh, according to the complaint. After that dinner, Maz allegedly begged her to have sex with him. The lawsuit further details a plethora of inappropriate behavior by Maz between 2017 and 2019.

Newman filed a written complaint to Amazon in June 2020, as well as an administrative complaint with the Washington, D.C. Office of Human Rights in September 2020. In October, Amazon fired Maz and told Newman it would look into whether discrimination has affected her career advancement at the company. But Amazon has not yet done anything to address the professional and financial harm she's experienced, according to the suit.

Amazon's investigation also found that Block made racially-charged comments toward Newman, but simply required that he complete diversity training.

"We do not tolerate discrimination or harassment of any kind," an Amazon spokesperson said in a statement to Protocol. "We immediately investigated Ms. Newman's sexual harassment claim and fired her harasser. The investigation also resulted in corrective action and additional training requirements for those in her reporting line. We also reviewed Ms. Newman's interview process, leveling and onboarding, and determined that she was properly placed in her role at the company. We are currently investigating the new allegations included in the lawsuit."

Newman was hesitant to come forward about her experiences, but felt inspired by the conversations and awareness around racial justice in light of the killing of George Floyd.

"I started thinking about why it was important for me to speak up," she said. Her hope is that sharing her story will help push Amazon and the tech industry as a whole toward more equitable treatment of employees of color and women.

The insidiousness of non-compete agreements

Newman wanted to leave Amazon after those interactions with Maz, but the non-compete agreement she signed with the company made it hard to do that.

While employed and for the 18 months following separation from Amazon, employees are not able to engage in any work that competes or aims to compete with any Amazon product or service. Amazon has its hands in variety of businesses, including ecommerce, cloud services, media, smart devices and so much more.

"It's a very broad blanket non-compete" that lasts 18 months, she said. Newman asked Amazon to be released from it last October after she came forward about the harassment and discrimination.

"And what I was told was that the company doesn't release employees from non-competes," she said.

It's true: Amazon takes non-compete agreements very seriously. In July 2019, Amazon sued former AWS executive Philip Moyer for joining Google's cloud team. Amazon declined to explain to Protocol why it requires employees to sign non-compete agreements.

Amazon's filed suit against Moyer happened around the same time Newman was thinking about leaving the company to go do similar work somewhere else. But Newman felt scared, given how Amazon treated Moyer.

"It was alarming to see that these weren't just words on a page," she said of the agreement. "Sometimes you're told that companies don't really enforce non-competes, but I have seen repeatedly over my time at the company that Amazon does in fact enforce non-competes."

Beyond Moyer, Newman said Amazon enforced the non-compete agreement against someone she knew personally.

"It caused me a great deal of pause," she said.

Newman's experiences at Amazon have led her to examine workplace policies. In doing so, she came across the Workforce Mobility Act, which was reintroduced in February. The bipartisan bill is designed to stop the use of non-compete agreements in many circumstances. Proponents of the bill argue that non-compete agreements such as Amazon's harm workers and stifle innovation. Those in favor of non-compete agreements generally argue that they're necessary in order for businesses to protect trade secrets.

"It's just time to have greater scrutiny and real regulatory and legislative action," Newman said. "We're just at a point where, without that, workers like myself are left to just kind of fend for themselves without some of the protection that you would expect."

Staying silent 'preserves the status quo'

Newman's peers cautioned her about the potential risks of coming forward. But Newman said she "was far worse off" by not saying anything.

"You have to speak up and use your voice," she said. Staying silent "just preserves the status quo."

A number of other Amazon employees from underrepresented backgrounds have shared with Newman their personal stories of being down-leveled and facing microaggressions at work. Those stories from colleagues have reaffirmed to Newman that coming forward was the right thing to do.

"I just want people to understand that while this is one person's account, it's also reflective of many, many other stories that people have where they might have children, or spouses, or many other reasons why they don't feel comfortable coming forward or why they are afraid to put their job at risk," she said. "I just want to be clear that my story is really one of many other stories just like this."

Newman also wants people to know that there is a "real toll" that these experiences take on employees, and especially on Black employees and other employees of color.

"It's an emotional and mental tax," she said, holding back tears.

A future at Amazon

In November 2020, Newman left her public policy position to join a different team within AWS. She wasn't convinced Amazon would protect her from retaliation, since she still had to communicate with Maz while going through the investigation process, so she decided another team was the best way forward for her. In her new role, Newman oversees AWS's startups strategy, focused on underrepresented founders.

"I'm very passionate about creating a level playing field for entrepreneurs so that they have access to the resources they need to execute and to build," she said. "And if I can do that work at Amazon and make a difference, great. I think time will tell as to whether it's a place I can continue to stay. And I think that for me, it's also predicated not just on my ability to do my job but how Amazon responds to this moment."

Newman wants to see Amazon put a more robust system in place to support survivors of harassment and abuse at the company. She also recommends Amazon stop down-leveling job candidates.

Internal Amazon data, for example, shows large disparities in performance review ratings between Black and white employees, Recode reported in February.

This year, Amazon says it will "inspect any statistically significant demographic differences" in performance ratings to try to determine the root causes.

"I want to see the company actually make real changes and not things around the margins so that the day-to-day lives of Black employees and other employees of color actually improve," she said. "It's not enough to just increase numbers. There needs to be a real focus on changing the systemic patterns. Without actually attacking those real core issues, there's a real question around whether it will make sense for me personally going forward."

May 3, 2021 6:50pm PT: This story has been updated to clarify that non-compete agreements are illegal in California.

Workplace

Experts say tech companies need to prepare for the next SCOTUS decision

HR experts said companies need to be proactive about protections for contraception, privacy and LGBTQ+ rights.

Experts say tech leaders need to start thinking about future Supreme Court rulings.

Photo: Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

Tech companies are still trying to prepare for a post-Roe world. But it might already be time to think about what the Supreme Court is planning next.

When the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade Friday, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a concurring opinion that the court should also reconsider rulings protecting contraception and same-sex relationships, citing Griswold, Lawrence and Obergefell. If those decisions were ever overruled, it would have massive implications for everyone, but especially for employees living in states where same-sex marriage is at risk of becoming illegal without a federal shield.

Keep Reading Show less
Lizzy Lawrence

Lizzy Lawrence ( @LizzyLaw_) is a reporter at Protocol, covering tools and productivity in the workplace. She's a recent graduate of the University of Michigan, where she studied sociology and international studies. She served as editor in chief of The Michigan Daily, her school's independent newspaper. She's based in D.C., and can be reached at llawrence@protocol.com.

Now that most organizations are returning to the office, there are varying extremes – some leaders demand that employees return to the office, with some employees revolting and some rejoicing to be together again. On the other hand, some companies have closed physical offices and made remote work permanent; creating a sigh of relief for some employees and creating frustration for others.

Most of us are somewhere in between, trying our best to take a measured approach at building the right hybrid strategy tailored to company culture. Some seemingly have begun to crack the code, while the majority are grappling with the when, how, why, and who of this new hybrid work reality.

Keep Reading Show less
Nathan Coutinho

Nathan Coutinho leads Logitech's global conferencing business strategy and analyst relations. A Swiss company focused on innovation and quality, Logitech designs products and experiences that have an everyday place in people's lives.Coutinho leads strategy and execution of Logitech's video conferencing solutions, from personal solutions to highly-scalable conference rooms.Coutinho has more than 25 years of experience in the IT industry with various roles in executive leadership, consulting, engineering, marketing and technical sales.

Policy

What’s next for tech in a post-Roe world

From employee support to privacy concerns, tech companies play a critical role in what’s to come for abortion access in the U.S.

States banning abortion means that tech will play a critical role in what’s to come for abortion access in the U.S.

Photo: Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The end of Roe v. Wade has sent the world of tech scrambling. Many companies are now trying to quickly figure out how to protect workers in states where abortion will be banned, while also facing potential privacy and legal ramifications.


Here’s a look at tech companies’ roles and responses to the ruling. We will update this page as news and events change.

Keep Reading Show less
Alex Eichenstein

Alex Eichenstein (@alexeichenstein) is Protocol's social media editor. Previously, she managed social media and audience engagement efforts at the Center for Public Integrity. She earned an B.A. in English, women and gender studies and political science from the University of Delaware. She lives in Washington, D.C.

Fintech

You’re thinking about Apple Pay Later all wrong

Apple’s “buy now, pay later” product has a distinctly different distribution strategy that means it doesn’t directly threaten Affirm, Klarna and Afterpay.

Apple Pay Later emerges as a distinctly different product than what Klarna and Affirm offer.

Image: Apple; Protocol

Apple’s entry into the “buy now, pay later” market was one of its worst-kept secrets: Analysts had been predicting the company’s rollout of a pay-later service as early as 2020. The most common read on the move was predictable: Apple was here to smash the competition. The company has a track record of jumping into new sectors late and still managing to come out on top — the iPod came out when there were tons of MP3 players on the market.

But some analysts have a starkly different view. When you look at it under the hood, Apple Pay Later emerges as a distinctly different product than what Klarna and Affirm offer, they say — and one that isn’t much of a market predator.

Keep Reading Show less
Veronica Irwin

Veronica Irwin (@vronirwin) is a San Francisco-based reporter at Protocol covering fintech. Previously she was at the San Francisco Examiner, covering tech from a hyper-local angle. Before that, her byline was featured in SF Weekly, The Nation, Techworker, Ms. Magazine and The Frisc.

Entertainment

Watch 'Peaky Blinders,' and more weekend recs

Don’t know what to do this weekend? We’ve got you covered.

Our recommendations for your weekend.

Photo: Netflix

We’re getting the weekend started early. Two of our favorite shows are back, and we’re digging a breakout hit vampire game that’s being called a “bullet heaven” and is only $3 on Steam.

Keep Reading Show less
Nick Statt

Nick Statt is Protocol's video game reporter. Prior to joining Protocol, he was news editor at The Verge covering the gaming industry, mobile apps and antitrust out of San Francisco, in addition to managing coverage of Silicon Valley tech giants and startups. He now resides in Rochester, New York, home of the garbage plate and, completely coincidentally, the World Video Game Hall of Fame. He can be reached at nstatt@protocol.com.

Latest Stories
Bulletins