A factory worker at Amy’s Kitchen who previously spoke out about working conditions has filed a formal complaint with the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health on behalf of all workers at the company’s Santa Rosa plant, which was the subject of an NBC News report about what workers described as an unforgiving environment that pushed them past the point of injury. The complaint to Cal/OSHA was filed on Jan. 20 by Cecilia Luna Ojeda, who previously spoke to NBC News along with one former and three current workers.

Vitamin Retailer reached out to the company for comments on the complaint, which were provided by Mike Resch, chief people officer at Amy’s Kitchen. “Amy’s is a family-owned company that knows our success is entirely attributable to the contributions of our more than 2,800 employees. We have invested significantly in new equipment, practices and cultural changes to maintain safe working conditions at our plants,” Resch stated.

“We conduct daily safety walks to look for any deviations from our established practices and to identify future improvements. As just one indicator of how Amy’s has prioritized our workers’ safety at our Santa Rosa plant, last year the plant recorded a safety record that is two times better than our industry average, with a recordable rate of 2.3 versus the industry standard of 5. As an indicator as to how our employees feel about the working conditions, the average tenure at our Santa Rosa plant is over 12 years.”

One of the matters discussed in Ojeda’s complaint was the speed of production lines. The complaint filed by Ojeda, which asked regulators to take “immediate action,” described unsafe speeds on the production line and workers who were not properly accommodated after they were injured.

“Line speeds are created with safety in mind,” said Resch. “They depend on multiple factors, including the meal, type of equipment used, level of automation, number of people staffed, and the number of lanes used on a particular shift. It is not permitted to exceed the maximum line speed.”

Most notably, the complaint alleged that employees who get injured on the job are not given proper accommodation. The complaint shared the story of one worker who asked for a chair following a recommendation from her doctor who subsequently was “ignored and shamed.” The story appears to match an account that a worker previously gave to NBC News about being denied a chair that her doctor requested.

Resch responded, “Consistent with our first core value to take care of each other, we provide care and support for any employee who is injured at work. It begins with taking proactive steps to prevent injuries in the first place, including investing in new equipment and providing robust training to our employees. If an injury occurs, however, the employee receives the care needed from a health care professional. If the employee requires an accommodation to return to work, we partner with the employee to identify a reasonable accommodation that will not risk the employee’s rehabilitation. If such an accommodation cannot be identified, the employee would go on leave and not return to work until they can come back safely.”

The workers, according to the report, “are expected to prove any injuries they report to human resources with a doctor’s note, typically from physicians working at a nearby Concentra, a for-profit urgent care chain. The Concentra doctors seemed to look at them superficially or downplay their injuries, the workers say.”

When asked why a doctor’s note, provided by employee Maria del Carmen Gonzalez, for surgery was “not deemed medically necessary” by Amy’s Kitchen’s workers’ compensation firm, Resch responded, “There is a standard process in the industry called utilization review where documentation is reviewed to confirm the medical necessity of a surgery. If the documentation is not sent or is insufficient, a denial can occur that may be remedied with providing the required documentation. So, it would be incorrect to assume that because a denial occurred, the surgery was not approved once the documentation was provided. Unfortunately,” he added, “we are not permitted to comment upon the private medical information of our employees.”