Feature When data scientist Andrew Breza learned that the Washington, D.C. attorney general was suing Amazon for excluding his zip code from its fastest delivery service, he immediately wanted to see the proof for himself – and he found it. 

“I didn’t even know you could export that data [from Amazon] until I read your story and it made me curious,” Breza told The Register in a recent interview. What Breza appeared to substantiate were key claims made by the Washington, D.C. attorney general’s office in its lawsuit. The suit, filed on December 4, accused Amazon of cutting two zip codes in east D.C. from its in-house delivery fleet’s service area (20019 and 20020) beginning in June 2022 without informing customers. 

Breza, a 20019 resident, provided the graph of the order history he exported, and a change in June ’22 is certainly noticeable.

Andrew Breza’s Amazon deliveries since 2017 showing which carrier delivered. – Click to enlarge

“I exported my Amazon order history and plotted how many deliveries were fulfilled by Amazon versus other carriers,” the data scientist told us. “You can see exactly when Amazon stopped delivering to 20019 and started outsourcing.” 

If you’re a resident in an area affected by Amazon’s delivery exclusion, or have suspicious about something similar going on in your area, you can download your Amazon data here; if you don’t want to be overwhelmed by all the info, be sure to only select “Your Orders” in the Select Data Category dropdown menu. 

The graph Breza created tells a stark tale: In June 2022, Amazon stopped delivering to his home in 20019. A second graph Breza provided that combines his and a neighbor’s orders (both are paying Amazon Prime customers) appears largely the same. 

Breza and McMahon’s combined Amazon delivery history. This chart only shows deliveries fulfilled by Amazon – Click to enlarge

“I was surprised to learn how targeted and absolute their policy was – they just removed two zip codes completely rather than it being part of a larger shift in strategy or priorities,” Breza said. “I was very surprised to learn this isn’t just how they do business in D.C. – that it was just these two zip codes.” 

D.C.’s east end needs Amazon Prime

Washington, D.C. is a city with a long history of racial segregation that, in the district’s own words, has “displaced thousands of black residents and concentrated their communities in the eastern sections of the district,” those being Wards 7 and 8 on the east side of the Anacostia River. 

The two zip codes that Amazon has excluded from its delivery network that are at issue in the AG’s lawsuit are both in Ward 7, a majority non-white district with a lower income and higher unemployment rates than the city average.

The area has long been underserved by essential retail services: There are no big box stores in 20019 or 20020, and very few grocery stores, either – just three of them serve the two zip codes, and they’re at opposite ends of the Ward.  

One of the Safeways that serves Ward 7, represented by Councilman and former D.C. mayor Vincent Gray, isn’t thought by some as being a good store. Gray has been critical of his district’s lack of good groceries for years, even performing a surprise inspection in 2017 after numerous resident complaints. Not much has improved since then, Breza claimed. 

“There’s been a lot of ‘supposed to’ in the retail history of this area,” Breza said. The lack of new business development in Ward 7 has left residents relying on Amazon for anything beyond the most basic groceries and household essentials. According to the AG’s office, around half of residents in 20019 and 20020 are Prime subscribers. 

When Amazon, seen as a leader, discriminates against that part of town it sends a signal

The Register was unable to speak directly with Gray, who is in poor health and whose term ends in January. Gray’s long-time spokesperson, Chuck Thies, did chat with us about the difficulties Ward 7 residents have had to deal with due to Amazon’s delays, which he says serve to reinforce the choices many businesses have made to not set up shop in the area.

“When Amazon, seen as a leader, discriminates against that part of town it sends a signal,” Thies told us. He said there’s long been a stigma associated with the east end that’s made it hard to attract businesses. Ward 5, on the west side of the Anacostia River, has the same amount of per household disposable income as Ward 7, Thies said, but the east side doesn’t get serviced because of stereotypes. 

“We tip our hat to AG,” Thies said. “I’m not sure what the genesis of the lawsuit was, but this clearly shows he’s paying attention to residents on the east end.” 

Gray, who is due to be replaced by Wendell Felder on January 2, has tweeted his support for the lawsuit, describing the practices as discriminatory and a rip-off for paying Prime customers. 

“You can limit deliveries regardless of reason but you can’t charge people for a premium service you’re not providing,” Thies told us. “Councilmember Gray expects Amazon to make every resident who was denied Prime service whole financially in the form of a refund. That is an expectation that he not only has, but sees as non-negotiable.”

The safety dance

Amazon doesn’t dispute that it has excluded the two zip codes from its delivery fleet’s service and offloaded the tasks to other carriers like the US Postal Service and UPS, maintaining in multiple communications with us that the issue pertains to driver safety. 

“In the zip codes in question, there have been specific and targeted acts against drivers delivering Amazon packages,” Amazon spokesperson Steve Kelly told us. “We made the deliberate choice to adjust our operations, including delivery routes and times, for the sole reason of protecting the safety of drivers.”

Thies does admit that crime rates in the east end are higher than in other parts of the city, but he contests the idea that Amazon’s drivers are in greater peril in Ward 7 than elsewhere – a sentiment echoed by Breza and his neighbor Norine McMahon. Neither dispute the need for Amazon to protect its employees, but they note that’s not the whole story. 

“I don’t dispute their concerns about safety,” McMahon told us. “We’re also hearing about those kinds of things happening in other parts of the city – not just here, not just in our part of town.”

It’s also worth pointing out that Amazon’s concern for driver safety appears situational. Delivery drivers wearing Amazon uniforms and driving branded vehicles, Amazon has argued in the past, are contractors, not employees. 

Those contractors suffer injury rates significantly higher than the industry average and have higher rates of safety violations, thanks in part to the frenetic pace the e-commerce giant forces its contracted delivery workers to move at – which often leaves drivers unable to take adequate breaks and use the bathroom. All the while, Amazon settled an FTC case for pocketing driver tips, and installed driver-facing cameras to monitor its contractors in the name of safety. 

Residents in 20019 and 20020 seem to be sick of that excuse. In a series of Nextdoor posts from the neighborhoods included in the AG’s lawsuit provided to The Register, many residents reported experiences with delivery delays and uncertainty as to why they were dealing with longer delivery times compared to friends and relatives elsewhere in the district. Many expressed support for the need to keep Amazon drivers safe, but not everyone was convinced. 

“The excuse of ‘it’s not safe’ is really tired,” said one commenter. “No place is safe.” 

“If it’s too dangerous for them to send their drivers, fair enough,” another resident noted. “But don’t offer Prime in those areas then.” 

Customers just want transparency

And there’s the rub: Protecting drivers is fine, but residents of D.C.’s east end feel like they’re being ripped off.

“The point that the AG was making [in the lawsuit] was that it’s about transparency,” McMahon told us. “When I place an order, it’ll tell me a delivery date, and as soon as I hit Buy, the completed order shows a day or two later. It changes from the time you add the item to your cart to the time you order it.” 

Similar stories were reported by other locals. 

“It may say if I order within three hours I’ll get it the next day; as soon as I order it they claim I’ll get it two days later,” one local said. Others pointed out that, prior to the lawsuit, they had been curious why deliveries had been slower. Some residents, like McMahon, have even taken to shipping orders to other addresses around town to get them faster. 

I am paying for a service that I am not receiving and for that I am upset

One thread that winds its way through all the dissatisfaction boils down to what one Nextdoor poster said: “I am paying for a service that I am not receiving and for that I am upset.”

“We stand by our customer promise which provides a transparent shopping and checkout process so customers know exactly when they can expect their orders to arrive,” Kelly said of the customer complaints. “The fact is, we want to deliver as fast as we possibly can to every zip code across the country.” 

With Amazon repeatedly telling us it has been transparent, we asked why Prime customers in east D.C. appeared to be largely unaware of the delivery exclusion before the lawsuit, or why so many expressed similar complaints about Amazon suddenly switching delivery estimates after orders were completed. Amazon maintains it hasn’t done anything wrong, and that the customer statements shared with it “require additional information to properly fact check and address.”  

Amazon pointed us to its Prime terms and conditions as evidence it was being clear about delivery benefits and speeds varying between items and locations. Its Prime Delivery Benefits page states that “nearly all addresses in [the] contiguous U.S.” are eligible for free two-day delivery. There is no apparent area for customers to check to see if their address is eligible for full Prime benefits. 

The e-commerce giant didn’t directly answer questions regarding whether it would consider offering different Prime rates for customers in eastern D.C. or other areas ineligible for Prime delivery benefits. 

All of this makes it seem an awful lot like it’s due to a lack of clarity and with no way to verify that certain customers are excluded from Prime delivery benefits, Amazon Prime customers in eastern D.C. are paying for a service they’re not getting. Amazon told us it “disagree[d] with [that] thesis” and referred us back to its statement and Prime T&Cs it linked us to. 

Councilman Gray’s office acknowledged that Amazon does issue caveats that Prime deliveries might not always happen on time, but Thies claimed the online giant’s excuse doesn’t fly when it comes to excluding 20019 and 20020 because “they weren’t doing their best” to ensure deliveries were as fast as possible. 

Thies expects the D.C. AG’s case will eventually result in a settlement and some form of corrective action, but that won’t come on Gray’s watch: Court documents in the matter indicate the initial scheduling conference won’t be held until March. 

In the meantime, residents of Washington D.C.’s east end will have to make do with slower deliveries while still paying full price for Prime, with few local options to turn to. ®