A system recorded 205 minutes of Time Off Task. The worker later testified that an abnormal pod workflow explained much of the scanner inactivity.

In federal employment litigation, an Amazon worker challenged a termination associated with approximately 205 minutes of Time Off Task. He later testified that a repeating-pod problem required him to interact with the computer and repeatedly use a skip function rather than perform the scanner activity normally expected by the system.

The court record also says he did not provide that explanation during the relevant employment meeting. This is therefore not presented as a finding that Amazon knowingly ignored a proven equipment problem. It illustrates something narrower: scanner inactivity and worker inactivity are not necessarily identical facts.