Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday August 30 2019, @03:20PM   Printer-friendly
from the what's-good-for-the-goose-is-good-for-the-gander dept.

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

The battle over how to classify ride-hail drivers in California has intensified, with neither side backing down. After a caravan of drivers protested across the state earlier this week, Uber and Lyft began widely circulating online petitions on Wednesday. The companies' goal: Get people to join them in defeating Assembly Bill 5 as it's currently written before it becomes law.

If passed, the California state bill could allow for ride-hail drivers to be classified as employees rather than independent contractors, their current status.

"AB 5 may lead to hundreds of thousands of California Lyft drivers out of work," Lyft's petition reads. "As a result, passengers could wait longer for rides or risk losing reliable access to rideshare altogether."

Uber issued similar warnings in its petition and said, "Forcing all drivers to become employees could drastically change the rideshare experience as you've come to know it, and would limit Uber's ability to connect you with the dependable rides you've come to expect."

Uber and Lyft drivers are now classified as independent contractors, sometimes referred to as gig-workers, which means they don't get benefits including Social Security, health insurance, paid sick days and overtime. Many drivers say this system has led to exploitation. They say they've seen lower pay, higher costs and longer working hours as the cost of living has risen over the years.

Advocates for AB 5 call the ride-hailing companies' petitions a "misinformation campaign" and "dishonest." Mobile Workers Alliance and Gig Workers Rising, which have been organizing drivers around AB 5, say the bill is about workers' rights.

"Both of these companies are doing what looks like a very desperate last-ditch effort to try to get their customer base to go against drivers' rights," said Coral Itzcalli, spokeswoman for Mobile Workers Alliance. "The scheme of independent contractors is what companies have used for decades. What it does is saddle the cost of the business on the average worker."

[...] As an alternative to the bill, Uber said Wednesday that it would offer drivers a minimum wage of approximately $21 per hour. It also said it would offer access to benefits, such as paid time off, sick leave and compensation if injured while driving for the company. Additionally, Uber said it would let drivers have a "collective voice" at the company and the "ability to influence decisions about their work."

Lyft hasn't offered specifics, but it did say it'll give drivers a guaranteed earnings floor, a portable benefits fund and representation within the company.

Mobile Workers Alliance and Gig Workers Rising say $21 per hour isn't enough, however. As independent contractors, drivers have to cover all of their own expenses, including gas, car maintenance and repairs.

"It's not acceptable," said Leonardo Diaz, who's been driving for Uber and Lyft full-time for the last four years. "We are asking for $30 an hour to cover all the expenses."

Itzcalli from Mobile Workers Alliance agreed and said the ride-hailing companies' alternatives to AB 5 don't do enough to fulfill workers' rights.

"These companies tout themselves as being innovative and creating the jobs of tomorrow," she said. "But the reality is there is nothing innovative about worker exploitation."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by darkfeline on Saturday August 31 2019, @10:25PM

    by darkfeline (1030) on Saturday August 31 2019, @10:25PM (#888329) Homepage

    Let me tell you about the Vizcaino v. Microsoft case.

    You see, once upon a time, Microsoft treated contractors somewhat well. Not as full time employees (FTEs), but better than what a contractor would usually get.

    The contractors felt like FTEs and thought they would demand all of the nice benefits that FTEs get. So they sued and won!

    As a result, companies around the world now treat contractors just as well as FTEs.

    Haha, just kidding! What ended up happening is that companies including Microsoft are forced to treat their contractors as second class citizens to avoid the legal liability of the contractors being considered FTEs. The contractors sued for better treatment and instead guaranteed that all contractors in the US are treated as second class citizens.

    And that, kids, is why "there oughta be a law" doesn't work.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/businesspropicks-us-findlaw-dont-treat-c/dont-treat-contractors-like-employees-idUSTRE53063S20090401 [reuters.com]

    --
    Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2