Amazon must face a former applicant’s charge that he was not properly notified of his rights under Massachusetts law concerning lie detector tests when he was required to take a “workstyle assessment” that included choosing among a variety of workstyle options (Korn v. Amazon).
Judge William Young determined on Wednesday that despite Amazon’s arguments to the contrary, the applicant plausibly pleaded in his June 2025 complaint that the workstyle assessment was a lie detector test under the law’s definition. Specifically, the plaintiff highlighted Amazon’s language that it “uses mechanisms to detect suspicious test behavior and responses” and that “if suspicious behavior is detected (e.g., attempts to plagiarize, fabricate, or use outside assistance), it will impact your current and possibly future Amazon applications.”
A lie detector test, under Massachusetts law, is a test that is “used or interpreted by an examiner for the purpose of purporting to assist in or enable the detection of deception, the verification of truthfulness, or the rendering of a diagnostic opinion regarding the honesty of an individual.”
Massachusetts makes it unlawful for employers, with few exceptions, to subject applicants or employees to a lie detector test or to make hiring or other decisions based on willingness to take such a test. Employers are also required to inform applicants in writing of their right to not undertake lie detector tests, which the plaintiff in Korn v. Amazon also alleged he was not provided.
Employers have run afoul of the lie detector provision of Massachusetts law previously; in 2024, CVS Health Corp. and CVS Pharmacy settled a proposed class-action lawsuit from an applicant who alleged he was unable to opt out of HireVue video interview technology or an artificial intelligence analysis, and that he was unable to challenge the results of the assessment.
Amazon did not respond to a request for comment by press time.