New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport filed the state’s fourth open lawsuit against Amazon on Tuesday, accusing the tech giant of creating worse work conditions for lower pay through its “anticompetitive” delivery driver network.
“Today, my office is acting to stand up for thousands of New Jersey delivery drivers who are being exploited every day by one of the world’s biggest, richest corporations,” Davenport said at a news conference.
The suit homes in on Amazon’s Delivery Service Partners (DSPs) program, which the company advertises as an opportunity for prospective entrepreneurs to open their own business while partnering with the tech giant by managing a local system of drivers. But these businesses are beholden to Amazon, Davenport argues, and the tech giant’s system prevents drivers from unionizing or getting better work conditions.
“These are the workers who bring Amazon packages to our front doors,” she said. “They often show up in Amazon vans, wearing Amazon vests, carrying boxes with the Amazon logo on them. And in our view, they are working longer hours in worse conditions and for less money because of Amazon’s anticompetitive behavior.”
These drivers earn “significantly less” than drivers for UPS, FedEx, and the U.S. Postal Service, according to the complaint.
The complaint describes a work environment of employee surveillance, union busting, and drivers having no choice but to urinate in water bottles to meet Amazon’s metrics.
“They must accept invasive surveillance that monitors their every moment and action while at work and face the possibility of immediate termination for the smallest infraction or failure to meet these unreasonable requirements,” the complaint states.
Steve Kelly, a spokesperson for Amazon, pushed back strongly on the claims made in the suit and accused Davenport of choosing to hold a news conference rather than seeking a greater understanding of the program.
“This complaint is not grounded in fact. The Attorney General’s characterization of the DSP Program and the claims about working conditions are just wrong. The truth is, DSPs are independent business owners who make their own decisions about hiring, fleet management, and capacity planning — and they choose whether to work with other companies besides Amazon,” Kelly said in a statement.
“Had the Attorney General bothered to look at the facts, they would have also seen that the vast majority of routes are finished on-time or early — built on real-world data accounting for stop complexity, traffic, and geography. DSPs manage their drivers’ workday and route execution, and DSP employees are free to choose their employer and associate with who they want, full stop.”
Kelly said the company was confident that it would prevail in court.
On its website, Amazon advertises the DSP program as providing “the unique opportunity to create jobs in your neighborhood and lead a team that delivers gifts, textbooks, and pet food to your community.”
But Davenport’s office argues that the DSPs “are anything but independent.”
“Rather, Amazon keeps control of the levers that matter — setting demanding operational requirements, monitoring driver performance, controlling route allocations, and restricting DSPs from hiring one another’s drivers — with exploitative consequences for the drivers themselves,“ her office said in a release.
Amazon did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the suit.
Davenport also alleges that Amazon monitors DSP workers with artificial intelligence and cameras inside the vehicles they drive, and that the company has intimidated and retaliated against drivers who were suspected of union organizing.
The complaint cites an incident in Queens, N.Y., in which Amazon allegedly sent drones to blacklist striking workers. It also cites an instance in Edison where workers were allegedly told that labor organizing could endanger DSP’s partnership with Amazon, putting their jobs in jeopardy.
The suit claims also accuses Amazon of blacklisting workers who support unionization from a broad network of DSPs, and cites workers who were terminated after their bosses learned they supported labor organizing.
Amazon is the dominant purchaser of this delivery driver labor, and since it is about buying rather than selling, their alleged anticompetitive practice is called a monopsony, rather than a monopoly. Davenport’s office said this is the first time a state has filed a monopsony complaint.
It adds to a list of court battles with the company.
In September 2023, former Attorney General Matthew Platkin joined the Federal Trade Commission and other states in suing the tech giant for allegedly maintaining a monopoly. Last October, Platkin filed one complaint over the company’s treatment of pregnant people and workers with disabilities, and another over how Amazon classifies certain workers as independent contractors and therefore denies them rights and benefits.
Davenport’s lawsuit Tuesday is the first lawsuit against Amazon filed under Democratic Gov. Mikie Sherrill’s administration, but the state’s top lawyer said the three other cases are ongoing.
The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, alleges violation of the federal Sherman Antitrust Act and New Jersey’s Antitrust Act and seeks damages for DSP drivers and for Amazon to stop the alleged behavior.




