Customers can only choose not demand, so this is simply a red herring to shift and diffuse blame and responsibility to consumers from the primary abuser who is actually doing this, and create an environment of helplessness.

Tomorrow if customers demand 10% of the existing prices are companies going to line up with slave labour conditions to deliver and then shift blame? Responsibility does not work like this.

'..are companies going to line up with slave labour conditions to deliver and then shift blame?'

No because we don't drag people off the street and force them to be delivery drivers. There is a level at which people feel incentivised to do this kind of work and there is a level at which they look for something else.

Of all involved parties, drivers and customers are the ones with least power to influence this decisions. By far.

That's why unions and governments pushed hard to regulate employment to protect workers during the last 150 years.

Yes and then (in the UK) the labour movement split into working class people and middle class people with a socialist ideology.

As it turned out, the two are not mutually compatible.

I don't see why this was downvoted. If Amazon would treat their drivers better, prices and/or delivery times would go up. And that would make a lot of customers go to competitors who might treat their drivers worse but offer a better deal.

Once upon a time, not so long ago, this was perfectly acceptable:

"Please allow 28 days for delivery"