Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United States Businesses

Uber, Postmates Sue California to Block Gig-Worker Law (bloomberg.com) 218

Uber and Postmates sued the state of California, alleging that a labor rights law set to go into effect this week is unconstitutional. From a report: The lawsuit filed Monday in Los Angeles federal court is a preemptive strike against the state's landmark measure designed to ensure gig workers receive employment protections. Uber and Postmates argue the legislative process around California's Assembly Bill 5 unfairly targeted gig economy companies while favoring other industries and that the law will threaten workers' flexibility. The passage of A.B. 5, which takes effect Wednesday, has set in motion a bitter dispute about the rights of Uber drivers, food couriers and other people who derive their income from apps made in Silicon Valley working as independent contractors. Uber and Postmates say it's arbitrary that direct salespeople, travel agents, grant writers, construction truck drivers, commercial fishermen and others are exempted from the law. "There is no rhyme or reason to these nonsensical exemptions, and some are so ill-defined or entirely undefined that it is impossible to discern what they include or exclude," according to the complaint.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Uber, Postmates Sue California to Block Gig-Worker Law

Comments Filter:
  • TAXI COMPANY (Score:2, Insightful)

    TAXI COMPANY
  • by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Monday December 30, 2019 @09:35PM (#59572210)
    so we've got a pro-corporate Supreme Court, and this is probably going to make it up to them in a few years. The law in question really just clarifies existing law and ensures that the law is enforced. It's nothing new. So if it gets struck down then, well, that's it for worker protections.

    Seriously, expect mass layoffs if they win. Every mega corp in the country will fire their staff and rehire them at lower pay and without benefits. Sure, there'll be a few guys at the very top that don't get that treatment, but everybody reading this get ready to lose your job in 3-5 years.

    SCOTUS has done some crazy things before though, and at least one of the pro-corp guys is a moderate, so it might not happen. Still, I think it's a lock if Trump wins since his last 2 appointments were pro-corporate and RBG isn't going to make it another 3 years. Not that Biden or Buttigieg wouldn't do the same. Warren's pick probably wouldn't, and Sanders' pick would strike this down, but then again Sanders would be directing the IRS to enforce existing law at the federal level and shut this gig crap down.

    Still, those of us with good jobs (or at least good paying ones) need to keep a close eye on this. It will effect us.
    • by AvitarX ( 172628 )

      I don't think they expect to win.

      They delayed filing until right before it takes effect. I think they just want to delay it taking effect with an injunction, and the later they file the longer that injunction will delay it coming into effect.

    • by Train0987 ( 1059246 ) on Monday December 30, 2019 @10:08PM (#59572294)

      Who are you to decide what jobs people are allowed to choose?

      • by DRJlaw ( 946416 )

        Who are you to decide what jobs people are allowed to choose?

        Asked every prostitute ever...

      • I'm an intelligent person who will make things better for everyone, that's who.

    • Mass layoffs if they win? Uber has been around 10 years, if any company wanted to follow their business model they would have done it already.
      • like the ones you and I work for. They'll do mass layoffs and rehire everybody as contractors and gig employees...
        • They could already fire full-time and part-time employees and replace them with contractors if they felt they could get the same quality and consistency of work. There's nothing stopping them from doing that now.

          So-called "gig workers" are a different animal. They don't have regular hours, and they don't really have project deadlines either. There's no real way to replace full-time employees with "gig workers". Notice how few companies were replacing traditional contract workers and/or full-time employe

    • I expect what will happen is that the California legislature will clarify the law, so it is clear to whom it applies, and at the same time they'll add some language indicating WHY certain professions are exempt and others aren't. That'll end the suit.

      Currently, driving for a construction company is exempt, driving for a delivery company isn't. The legislature isn't supposed to arbitrarily favor one group over another. They are supposed to have some articulable reason for penalizing one group and not the o

      • They've boxed themselves in a corner. If they change their ill-advised law now it will be obvious they were targeting specific companies. Either way the law gets thrown out and the State Rep who authored it is going to be tossed out by the voters she already got fired. Vox has already fired 200 freelancers and they are furious.

  • by llZENll ( 545605 ) on Monday December 30, 2019 @09:47PM (#59572246)

    âoeThere is no rhyme or reason to these nonsensical exemptions, and some are so ill-defined or entirely undefined that it is impossible to discern what they include or exclude,"

    Since when did laws have to make any sense?!?

  • by OneSmartFellow ( 716217 ) on Monday December 30, 2019 @10:39PM (#59572390)
    In many states, At Will employment means that employees have zero rights anyway.  If you can be fired without notice or cause, you're not really any different than a gig worker.
    • by fred911 ( 83970 )

      Actually the only difference between a right to work state and an at will state has to to with workers rights to unionize. Other than that, employers do have the right to terminate an employee at will. But they are responsible for assuring the reason for termination is legal and they are responsible for paying their share of taxes and insurance. Big difference between the actual amount of money workers keep between a 1099 and a W2.

      • Most businesses do not have to offer any insurance at all. So we're talking about UI and part of SSI/FICA only. About an 8% difference.
        • they tried to force business to offer insurance it dam near crashed are economy and caused mass unemployment. guess you have a short memory.
          • The laws today do not mandate insurance for companies of less than 50 employees. That's most businesses - no need to provide insurance.
    • Uber drivers do not get paid for driving towards each pickup (barring a few exceptions which almost never happen). And Uber drivers do not get paid for waiting between jobs.

      That's the difference. In other words, an Uber driver can be online and working 50+ hours a week, but the app itself will say that they've only been working less than 30 hours that week.

  • by ezelkow1 ( 693205 ) on Monday December 30, 2019 @11:15PM (#59572464)

    "Uber and Postmates say it's arbitrary that direct salespeople, travel agents, grant writers, construction truck drivers, commercial fishermen and others are exempted from the law. "There is no rhyme or reason to these nonsensical exemptions, and some are so ill-defined or entirely undefined that it is impossible to discern what they include or exclude," according to the complaint."

    Just like that decision about computer-related occupations being salary exempt? Waahh arbitrary thing not good for me this time

  • I'm not sure what this law is supposed to do. I haven't had time to read it yet. But it directly affects me. I live in California and for the last 5 months I have been using postmates and doordash as my primary income to keep from being homeless and starving. Prior to that I had a moderately successful technology consulting and software company. IOW I was an independent contractor (company of 1 haha). These companies do so many things that scream employee. Not contractor. Don't believe the PR / apologist tr
  • Some Uber drivers *do not* want to be employees. It might be advantageous to some, but definitely not all.

    If you are idling, and waiting to be compensated "minimum wage", I think you are doing it wrong. I spoke to several friends who do Uber, and they easily make many times that amount.

    Some of them incorporated to their own taxi service (still working for Uber and Lyft, but at higher *black* level), others used this opportunity to finish a coding bootcamp, and starting a long term career. These are in confl

  • I freelanced for half of my career and didn't find it cruel. I started doing freelance gigs while still in college and at some point I was so successful I even started my own business. At one point I managed 5 simultaneous projects.
    In my country Uber drivers are simply required by the government to incorporate as a one-man business before dealing with Uber.
    And just like myself, some are so successful they manage to buy other cars and eventually stop driving on a full time basis.
    Up until the dawn of mechaniz

  • Rhyme AND reason (Score:4, Informative)

    by torkus ( 1133985 ) on Tuesday December 31, 2019 @02:42AM (#59572794)

    > There is no rhyme or reason to these nonsensical exemptions, and some are so ill-defined or entirely undefined that it is impossible to discern what they include or exclude

    What's nonsensical is this claim. The exemptions are people who typically make a substantial wage but who's jobs are very seasonal (travel agents, fishermen, etc.) and/or work for small companies ... and not people who are literally being squeezed into oblivion by massive corporations trying to increase the bottom line for investors.

  • Wow, workers' rights are unconstitutional? What a country we live in

Love makes the world go 'round, with a little help from intrinsic angular momentum.

Working...