Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday February 13 2020, @12:51PM   Printer-friendly
from the who-'s-the-boss? dept.

Uber and Postmates won't be getting the reprieve they were hoping for from a new California gig worker law. A federal judge denied their request to put a temporary stop to AB 5 while a lawsuit they filed against the state works its way through the courts. This means both companies are still beholden to the law, which could force them to reclassify their drivers as employees.

"The court does not doubt the sincerity of these individuals' views, but it cannot second guess the legislature's choice to enact a law that seeks to uplift the conditions of the majority of nonexempt low income workers," US District Judge Dolly M. Gee wrote in a 24-page ruling on Monday. "The balance of equities and the public interest weigh in favor of permitting the state to enforce this legislation."

AB 5 boils down to worker classification. Currently, most workers for gig economy companies, like Uber, Lyft, Postmates and DoorDash, are classified as independent contractors. While that classification can mean increased flexibility for workers, it can also mean those drivers are shouldering many of the costs of their employers. Uber drivers, for example, pay for their own car, phone, gas and vehicle maintenance. They also don't get basic benefits, such as minimum wage guarantees, overtime pay and health insurance.

Under AB 5, which went into effect on Jan. 1, all companies using independent contractors in California will be put to a three-part test to determine whether they must reclassify their workers. If they don't pass that test, they'll have to turn their workers into employees.


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This discussion has been archived.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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 14 2020, @12:39AM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 14 2020, @12:39AM (#957947)

    You have asked the wrong question in that case, and are playing directly into the hands of your awful health insurance industry when you ask that question.

    Then what is the "right" question to ask? Just because the question doesn't give the answer you want doesn't make it the "wrong question."

    You can argue that Americans "should" want to public funded healthcare, just like you could argue that Americans "should" want nuclear power, to put humans on Mars, to have bible studies be a subject in public school, should make buying firearms illegal, should make class action lawsuits illegal, or any number of other things you believe.

    I'd say that the majority of Americans, for better or worse, in actuality don't want government run healthcare, in large part because "change in scary." My unscientific intuition would guess guess that about 1/4 of the population knows about the topic and want Single Payer, about 1/4 know the topic and don't want Single Payer (divided between those who like status-quo and those who want something less drastic a change than Single Payer), and about 1/2 of the people don't understand the topic and are scared to lose what they know (these are the same people who say "keep the government out of my Medicare").

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by PartTimeZombie on Friday February 14 2020, @02:02AM

    by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Friday February 14 2020, @02:02AM (#958002)

    You may be deliberately misunderstanding me.

    "Government run" healthcare would be stupid, so nobody has their government run their healthcare system. What they do is have a publicly funded system that healthcare experts run.

    As an example, when Mrs. PartTimeZombie fell down the stairs a couple of years ago and broke her ankle, we called an ambulance and took her to the hospital. None of the doctors or nurses rang the Health Minister to ask what treatment they should use, because how the hell would he know?

    You can argue that Americans "should" want to public funded healthcare, just like you could argue that Americans "should" want nuclear power, to put humans on Mars, to have bible studies be a subject in public school, should make buying firearms illegal, should make class action lawsuits illegal, or any number of other things you believe.

    I have never argued any of those things, and don't really care if you guys do that smart thing and demand proper healthcare. Bible study in schools would be good though, because bible study turns kids into atheists.

  • (Score: 2) by helel on Friday February 14 2020, @02:04AM

    by helel (2949) on Friday February 14 2020, @02:04AM (#958005)

    The right question to ask would be "Are you willing to give the a handful of sociopaths with business degrees 100% control of what healthcare you and everybody receives?" If they answer "no" then they are clearly against the "free market" solution we are using now and can be assumed to favor government provided health care.

    At a minimum this bad question would get closer to the true answer which is that 60% of USians believe the government has a responsibility to insure that all Americans have health coverage. [pewresearch.org]

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 14 2020, @10:52AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 14 2020, @10:52AM (#958138)

    The right question is:

    "Do you feel that decisions about your health should be performed by businessmen with no medical background and a vested interest in paying out a minimum, by certified health care professionals with a vested interest in restoring your health, or something else?"

    Only answering that you want businessmen making the decisions is a response in favor of private health care.