Four ex-delivery drivers for Amazon Prime Now, the service that gets Amazon Prime customers their products in as little as one hour, have sued (PDF) their former employer. They claim they were denied wages and benefits because Amazon illegally classified them as independent contractors.

"Amazon’s mission to deliver ‘Now’ at no additional cost to its customers is being funded by the delivery drivers," said Beth Ross of Oakland-based Leonard Carder LLP, who represents the plaintiffs. "Unlike the drones that Amazon hopes to eventually replace them with, these drivers are human beings with rent to pay and families to feed."

Amazon Prime Now was rolled out earlier this year in 10 markets, including Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area.

The four plaintiffs come from Orange County and Victorville, and they worked for Amazon's warehouse in Irvine, California. Drivers there were originally paid $11 per hour, plus $2.50 per delivery. A new contract signed in mid-September kept the wage at $11 per hour but cut the $2.50 per delivery fee.

Drivers are responsible for their own insurance, fuel, and maintenance costs, and they don't get workers' compensation insurance. Because Amazon doesn't classify them as employees, they also don't get legally mandated meal breaks or overtime pay when they work more than 40 hours per week.

Amazon hires the drivers through another company called Scoobeez, Inc., which is also named as a defendant in the case.

While they lack the benefits of employees, Prime Now workers also don't have much choice in how they work. The Amazon Prime Now app "generates routes and directions for each delivery," telling the drivers exactly how to drive and tracking them while they're out on deliveries. Drivers are instructed not to deliver "two minutes early or two minutes late," according to the complaint.

They're scheduled to work fixed shifts and required to report to the Amazon warehouse 15 minutes before their scheduled start time. Amazon decides how many packages each driver will get and where they'll go. "Plaintiffs cannot reject work assignments, nor can they request that their deliveries be restricted to a particular geographic area."

The suit claims that Amazon violated California's minimum wage law, failed to pay overtime, and violated rules regarding break periods and wage accounting.

"I never see an accounting of what tips I receive, because everything is paid through an app," plaintiff Taree Truong said in a statement from her law firm. "I have no way of knowing whether or not I have been paid what I am due."

Amazon didn't respond to requests for comment about the lawsuit.

Several lawsuits with similar claims have been filed recently against startups that pay their workers as contractors rather than employees. Ride-sharing giant Uber is the biggest target: it's fighting employee claims in court, as well as a California regulatory body that claims drivers should be employees.

House-cleaning service Homejoy was hit with a lawsuit earlier this year and ended up shutting down in July. That same month, a Massachusetts woman sued Handy, saying she was paid $14 for 30 hours of cleaning work. In June, Instacart offered its shoppers and delivery personnel the choice of being contractors or part-time employees. Two more San Francisco-based food delivery startups were sued over alleged labor violations last month.