When Uber and Lyft threatened this week to stop operating in California over a state law to reclassify gig workers, San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo lined up with a Republican opponent to take a stand.
Liccardo said he entered the debate because moving away from the giant-sharing giants in the state would hurt workers even more during the current economic crisis.
“We need to move beyond the rigid dichotomy of employer versus independent contractor,” Liccardo told San José Spotlight Aug. 21. “That’s a 19th-century model that no longer works in a 21st-century economy.”
In a joint statement with San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer, Liccardo said the vast majority of drivers want to remain self-employed.
The mayors ignored party lines to allow a champion of a “portable benefit fund” that workers could raise money from one or more gig jobs to use on whatever benefit they most needed, such as health care or paid leave. On August 10, Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi wrote an opinion in The New York Times that supports such a system.
“There are too many independent employees struggling with inadequate compensation and non-existent pension and safety net benefits,” Liccardo said. “And we have to do better and we can find a better way. But we do not have to shut down the gig economy to do that. ”
A decision on 20 August 20 Court of Appeals gave the giant giants more time to classify drivers as employees rather than as independent contractors.
Formal enforcement of AB 5, a state law passed in 2019 requiring the reorganization, was set to take place on August 20 for Uber and Lyft, who have been ignoring the mandate for months. A California judge ordered the companies to comply with the Aug.10 law and gave them an additional 10 days to appeal the decision.
The upcoming deadline sent the companies into a tailspin. To evade the order, Uber and Lyft filed the emergency call and threatened to terminate services in California if their appeal was not allowed.
“We are pleased that the Court has acknowledged the important issues raised in this case, and that access to these critical services will not be denied while we continue to advocate for drivers’ ability to work with the freedom they want, Uber said in a statement.
UPDATE: We’re still running in California – for now.
A court has granted our request for stay. This means we can stay riding share in California for all drivers and riders who are from it. A big thank you to everyone who encouraged California to continue our service! Ride on 🚗– Lift (@lyft) August 20, 2020
Among workers of gig economy, the debate over AB 5 was one of freedom versus security.
San Jose resident Edan Alva is a Lift driver and organizer with Gig Workers Rising, a campaign advocating for app workers’ rights. He said companies with ride-sharing shares “are no different than most criminals” for seeking benefits from drivers under AB 5 and that portable benefits are not enough.
“Everyone should receive a minimum wage and the basic protection for labor, which is prescribed by law and is there for a reason,” Alva said. “You do not want people to run into other people who are sick and too ill to see a doctor.”
Alva became ill in January and did not have enough money to pay rent, let alone a steep medical bill.
‘People should not be in that situation, period. “People need to have enough space to save for times when they are in some emergency and they need to get over it and not work for a while,” Alva said. “Maybe even – they can forbid God that they can take a vacation once in a while.”
Just as a reminder, yesterday’s court of residence does not change anything for workers.
We must defeat # Prop22.
And, we demand that Uber and Lyft stop using their drivers as collateral in this political ploy and immediately provide the workers for protection against pay and employee.
– Gig Workers Rising (@GigWorkersRise) 21 August 2020
When the pandemic began, Alva said he spent all of his $ 5-an-hour earnings on cleaning supplies to disinfect his passenger car. He said he will not drive again until the virus calms down.
He urges voters to vote no on Proposition 22, a measure intended for the November vote that would classify app drivers as independent contractors, and challenge the classifications mandated by AB 5.
Proponents of Prop. 22 and critics of AB 5 argue for the flexibility and freedom that independent status of contractors gives to drivers. Uber and Lyft have the Prop. 22 campaign public support.
“For several years we have been advocating for a way to provide benefits for drivers using the Lift platform – including a guarantee of minimum earnings and a health care subsidy – while maintaining the flexibility and control enjoyed by independent contractors, said Lyft in a blog post. “This is what drivers have repeatedly told us they want.”
AB 5 frees certain workers, such as health care professionals, hairdressers and insurance agents, from having to be classified as employees. For this reason, Liccardo said lawmakers should return to the drawing board.
“The law has already become Swiss cheese,” Liccardo said. “Shouldn’t we just come to the table and find a better way?”
A higher appeal will decide the case on parts of driving and will hear oral arguments. Oct. 13. If the court does not rule in their favor, the companies will have to submit written consent that they will comply with the law.
Contact Carly Wipf at [email protected] or follow @CarlyChristineW on Twitter.
