Search Results for: Matthew Platkin
Attorney General Platkin and Labor Commissioner sue Amazon over worker misclassification
Attorney General Platkin and Labor Commissioner sue Amazon over worker misclassification
Trenton, NJ – Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin and New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development Commissioner Robert Asaro-Angelo have filed a lawsuit against Amazon and its delivery network. The state charges that Amazon has misclassified Flex delivery drivers as independent contractors, violating state labor laws.
The lawsuit alleges that Amazon deprives Flex drivers of wages, benefits, and legal protections designated for employees. As a result of these alleged violations, New Jersey Flex drivers and related funds have suffered significant financial losses.
Flex drivers utilize their own vehicles for deliveries while covering their own operational costs. Amazon has branded the Flex program as a means for individuals to have a flexible income opportunity, yet it maintains strict control over delivery processes.
The lawsuit claims that by misclassifying Flex drivers, Amazon avoids providing rights such as minimum wage and mandated sick leave. Platkin stated, “Amazon is taking advantage of Flex drivers.”
Commissioner Asaro-Angelo emphasized that misclassifying workers is illegal. “Flex drivers deserve proper classification,” he noted.
Many Flex drivers have been operating in New Jersey since 2017. An investigation into Amazon’s practices commenced when some Flex drivers sought unemployment and disability benefits, indicating Amazon’s lack of contributions to state funds.
The complaint, filed in Essex County’s Superior Court, outlines how Amazon’s business model harms Flex drivers. It highlights instances where drivers have worked over 40 hours without receiving earned overtime and where injuries have left them without essential sick leave.
New Jersey law presumes workers to be employees unless specific conditions are met. Amazon allegedly fails to meet these criteria, as drivers undergo training, do not manage independent businesses, and must adhere to Amazon’s operational guidelines.
The lawsuit details violations including wage withholding and failure to maintain accurate records. It seeks to stop unlawful practices, recover unpaid wages, and enforce penalties.
The state has prioritized addressing worker misclassification, previously settling cases against companies like Lyft and Uber. Since new legislation aimed at curbing such practices was enacted, New Jersey has collected significant penalties from misclassified workers.
Misclassification costs New Jersey taxpayers millions in lost contributions to state funds. With this lawsuit, the state aims to enforce labor laws and protect Flex drivers from exploitation.
Nearly Three Dozen Now Lawsuits and Counting: Attorney General Platkin Sues Trump Over Cuts to Solar Programs
Attorney General Platkin files lawsuit against EPA over termination of solar program for low-income households
TRENTON, NJ — New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin, alongside 22 other plaintiffs, has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin. This legal action concerns the illegal termination of a $7 billion program designed to provide solar energy to more than 900,000 households in low-income and disadvantaged communities across the country.
“The Trump Administration’s anti-environmental agenda is not only extreme and harmful, but also completely lawless,” said Attorney General Platkin. He added that the “President and his appointees cannot simply eliminate Congressionally-authorized programs on a whim.”
The Solar for All program was established by Congress in 2022 as part of the Inflation Reduction Act. It directed the EPA to grant competitive funds for deploying solar projects in underprivileged areas. By August 2024, the program’s funding had been fully awarded, with New Jersey and the other plaintiffs proceeding with project planning and stakeholder engagement.
However, in August, the EPA suddenly terminated the program and retracted the majority of the funds that had already been allocated. This decision left the plaintiff states without necessary resources to advance their solar initiatives despite their previous planning and commitments of state funds.
When taking office in January, President Trump focused on fossil fuel extraction while disregarding solar energy. In July, Congress passed the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” rescinding some funds for the Solar for All program. Although the EPA had previously allocated all project funding, it instead chose to terminate the program unlawfully on August 7.
Platkin and a coalition of states are pursuing legal recourse in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. They allege that the EPA’s actions violated the Administrative Procedure Act and the U.S. Constitution’s Separation of Powers Doctrine. Simultaneously, New Jersey and additional grant recipients have initiated a lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.
The complaint in the Federal Claims Court cites a breach of the agreements stemming from the funding cancelation. The plaintiffs seek monetary damages, interest, and fees.
Attorney General Platkin’s action represents a significant effort to uphold legal agreements aimed at providing affordable solar energy in New Jersey and other states impacted by the EPA’s termination of the program.
In a major pushback against federal actions, this lawsuit underscores the ongoing battle for access to clean energy for low-income households.
AG Platkin Says He Will Fight as New Jersey Magazine Ban Faces Biggest Challenge Yet
Attorney General defends New Jersey’s gun laws as court case looms
PHILADELPHIA — New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin issued a statement as oral arguments began at the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit regarding ANJRPC v. Platkin. The Attorney General emphasized the impact of New Jersey’s gun safety laws, stating that they led to record low numbers of shootings in the state over the last two years.
Platkin said, “This significant achievement is under threat by the gun lobby seeking to bolster their profits at the cost of the lives of New Jerseyans.” He noted the commitment of the Murphy Administration to saving lives in New Jersey through various initiatives, including the establishment of the Statewide Affirmative Firearms Enforcement Office.
Today’s hearing will involve defending longstanding restrictions on assault weapons and large capacity magazines, laws that have been in place for 35 years. These laws continue to be positioned as crucial for protecting residents.
According to Platkin, these weapons are poorly suited for civilian self-defense and are instead designed for military combat. He stated that they are disproportionately used in mass shootings nationwide, referencing events such as the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting and the Las Vegas mass shooting.
All Circuits that have reviewed Second Amendment challenges to similar bans post-Bruen have rejected those challenges. Solicitor General Jeremy Feigenbaum is set to represent the state during today’s arguments before the Third Circuit.
The implications of the ruling could influence gun control measures across the United States as New Jersey maintains its stance on gun safety laws.
As the Third Circuit hears these critical arguments, the future of New Jersey’s stringent gun policies hangs in the balance.
Platkin Sues Trump Again: New Jersey joins legal fight against Trump’s National Guard deployment
New Jersey joins legal fight against Trump’s National Guard deployment
TRENTON, NJ – New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin, alongside a coalition of 24 attorneys general and governors, filed a brief on Saturday in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. The brief supports Illinois in opposition to President Trump’s deployment of the National Guard without approval from the state’s governor.
The coalition’s brief asserts that the President’s actions violate the law, undermine civilian control of the military, and threaten state sovereignty and principles of federalism. Recent orders from the Trump Administration have sent the National Guard to various localities, including California, Washington, D.C., Oregon, and Illinois.
“Judges across the country have made clear what is laid out in the Constitution – Trump’s domestic National Guard deployments are illegal,” Platkin stated. The brief argues that the President’s use of armed forces in these instances parallels actions commonly seen in authoritarian regimes.
On Friday, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals denied the Trump Administration’s request for an immediate administrative stay, although it did allow for the federalization of the Guard during the stay request’s pendency. The court barred the deployment of any federalized National Guard in Illinois.
Platkin urged the court to reject a broad stay pending appeal that would facilitate the deployment of troops to Chicago. The brief asks the appellate court to uphold the lower court’s decision, which affirms the separation of powers between state and federal authorities.
The attorneys general from Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawai‘i, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington joined Platkin in filing the brief. Governors from Kansas, Kentucky, and Pennsylvania also supported the effort.
As tensions rise over the deployment issue, the coalition stands firm in its stance against perceived encroachments on state authority.
Government leaders are united in the fight against Trump’s controversial use of National Guard forces across states.
