Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by takyon on Tuesday September 10 2019, @08:44PM   Printer-friendly
from the autonomous-car-turbo-button dept.

California Democrats are poised to pass landmark employment legislation over the objections of two of the companies that would be most affected: Silicon Valley ride-sharing giants Uber Technologies Inc. and Lyft Inc.

The bill already passed the State Assembly 59-15 and is expected to be voted on in the state Senate before the legislative session ends on Friday, possibly as soon as Monday night. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has said he would sign the bill, which intends to force companies that rely on “gig workers” to reclassify them as employees, likely upending the business model of those companies.

Uber and Lyft have spent much of the year pushing lawmakers to alter the bill or exempt them. That effort has failed against opposition from labor unions and a large Democratic majority in Sacramento. The companies have argued the bill would introduce new costs and logistical challenges that would be bad for them and many of their employees, who prefer job flexibility. If the measure becomes law, it is expected to have national repercussions given California’s economic importance and history of creating precedent-setting business regulations.


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This discussion has been archived.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: 3, Touché) by DannyB on Tuesday September 10 2019, @09:24PM (2 children)

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday September 10 2019, @09:24PM (#892385) Journal

    If they are being underpaid AND exploited then THAT WOULD MAKE THEM employees under state law.

    Not independable confactors.

    --
    People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Touché=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Touché' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday September 10 2019, @10:30PM (1 child)

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Tuesday September 10 2019, @10:30PM (#892410) Homepage
    In that case the state law is worded in a way that simply contradicts the well-established meaning of simple words in English.
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:09PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 11 2019, @03:09PM (#892718)

      that whole sentence sounds like a politicans sentence, one which intends to indicate that anyone that disagrees is somehow without sense or a grasp of simple things.

      it could be the state law is clarifying what they believe the terms mean, and making it so -- much to the disappointment of the exploitative business model.

      no one should cheer uber's business model, and the sooner it fails, the better everyone else will be, even if it no longer means you get to exploit the drivers with the click of a button, too.