Latest news with #Proposition22
San Francisco Chronicle
21-04-2025
- Business
- San Francisco Chronicle
San Francisco sues delivery company, alleging it misclassifies its drivers as contractors
San Francisco's legal campaign against companies that classify on-call drivers, cooks and other workers as independent contractors rather than employees has a new target: GoShare, which delivers products to businesses and private customers. In a lawsuit being filed Monday in San Francisco Superior Court, City Attorney David Chiu's office says GoShare is violating California law and the rights of its drivers to be paid fairly for their work. 'Denying workers their benefits and wages is especially egregious when so many workers are struggling in this economy to make ends meet,' Chiu said in a statement announcing the suit. Declaring support from organized labor, Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Federation of Labor Unions, said that 'when companies seek a competitive advantage by misclassifying workers, everyone else loses: businesses that follow the law, and workers who are cheated out of what they've earned.' As a Democratic Assembly member from San Diego, Gonzalez wrote AB5, the 2019 state law that defined workers as employees if they performed the same basic work as the company that hired them. GoShare did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The company, based in San Diego, delivers goods locally from nearby warehouses and stores in trucks and smaller vehicles owned by its drivers. Since its founding in 2015, more than 15,000 drivers have made 100,000 deliveries to customers in 15 states, Chiu's office said. GoShare says its drivers operate their own businesses and should be considered contractors. Unlike employees, independent contractors have no legal right to minimum wages, overtime, sick leave, union representation, or payment for work expenses, such as auto repairs and fuel costs. In 2020, a year after the labor-backed AB5 became law, California voters approved Proposition 22, which reclassified as contractors the 1.4 million app-based drivers in the state who carry passengers for Uber and Lyft or deliver food for companies such as Instacart and DoorDash. The state Supreme Court unanimously upheld Prop. 22 last July. Chiu's lawsuit contends the ballot measure does not apply to GoShare because it schedules its deliveries in advance, giving the company more control over its services, while companies like Uber and Lyft show up when a customer calls, said Jen Kwart, a spokesperson for the city attorney. She noted that Qwick, a company that sends food servers, cooks and other staff to restaurants and hotels and pays them after deducting a fee, agreed to reclassify its workers as employees and compensate them $1.85 million for lost wages in a settlement with San Francisco in February 2024. GoShare drivers are also app-based and can choose their customers, facts the company could cite in arguing that it is covered by Prop. 22. But Chiu's office said in the lawsuit that GoShare decides whether to approve each customer, tracks the deliveries, penalizes drivers who show up late and pays them no more than $500 per delivery, barring them from receiving additional payments from their customers. 'GoShare's business is to provide moving and delivery services to customers,' the suit said. 'GoShare's drivers perform this very work and they do so under GoShare's control.' The suit seeks a court order classifying the drivers as employees, compensation to the drivers for lost wages, and civil penalties payable to the city.
Yahoo
08-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
California lawmakers to propose legislation giving ride-hailing drivers right to unionize
California lawmakers are pursuing legislation that could give drivers for apps like Uber and Lyft the ability to form unions, while still being classified as independent contractors. Assemblymembers Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland) and Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) plan to introduce Assembly Bill 1340, also titled the Transportation Network Company Drivers Labor Relations Act, on Tuesday. The legislation would allow drivers to negotiate pay as well as other terms of their agreements with app-based companies, exempting them from state and federal antitrust laws that would prohibit such activity, according to a draft reviewed by the Times. "Fundamentally what this bill seeks to do is empower rideshare drivers to advocate for better working conditions," Wicks said in an interview. The proposal does not include food delivery drivers. The exact process of how collective bargaining would be overseen by the state is not outlined in the proposal. Wicks and Berman said that they expect those details to be hashed out during the legislative process, with conversations from all stakeholders, including drivers, ride-hailing companies and Service Employees International Union California, which is backing the bill. Typically, antitrust laws would prevent collective action by independent contractors. For example, Seattle faced litigation when it attempted to establish a driver bargaining model through a local ordinance in 2015. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and an Uber subsidiary successfully challenged the law, arguing that bargaining by independent-contractor drivers amounted to illegal concerted action and price fixing. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit disagreed with the city's position that it had created a state-supervised regulatory program, finding that it was not exempt from antitrust law. Drivers for Uber and Lyft are considered independent contractors under a voter-approved state law — Proposition 22 — that went into effect in late 2020. The law originally had barred collective bargaining over drivers' compensation, benefits and working conditions, but an appeals court struck down the provision, arguing it inappropriately limited the California Legislature's authority. The state Supreme Court in a ruling last year largely upheld Proposition 22 but did not address the collective bargaining provision. SEIU California contends that the Legislature has the authority to allow drivers to collectively bargain, based on the appeals court ruling. However, if the bill is ultimately approved by lawmakers, it's possible ride-hailing companies might challenge it. 'A union is the only pathway for 600,000 rideshare drivers to improve their pay and working conditions under Prop 22," said Tia Orr, executive director of SEIU California, in an emailed statement. Uber and Lyft representatives said the companies opposed the proposal, arguing it would make rides more costly for consumers and go against the will of voters who approved Proposition 22. "At a time when families' budgets in California are stretched to the max, this proposal would make trips even more expensive," said Uber spokesperson Zahid Arab in an email. Lyft spokesperson Shadawn Reddick-Smith said Proposition 22 is drivers "preferred way to structure benefits and protections." The California proposal is similar to a ballot initiative approved by Massachusetts voters in the fall that was also backed by the Service Employees International Union — as well as the International Assn. of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. Uber and Lyft did not oppose the Massachusetts initiative. Minnesota lawmakers proposed a similar bill in February, and unions in Illinois have begun a campaign to unionize drivers in the state, with Uber agreeing to refrain from interfering with the effort. "This isn't coming out of left field, " Berman said. "It aligns with our values in California to make sure drivers get the rights they deserve." Sign up for our Wide Shot newsletter to get the latest entertainment business news, analysis and insights. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
08-04-2025
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
California lawmakers to propose legislation giving ride-hailing drivers right to unionize
California lawmakers are pursuing legislation that could give drivers for apps like Uber and Lyft the ability to form unions, while still being classified as independent contractors. Assemblymembers Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland) and Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) plan to introduce Assembly Bill 1340, also titled the Transportation Network Company Drivers Labor Relations Act, on Tuesday. The legislation would allow drivers to negotiate pay as well as other terms of their agreements with app-based companies, exempting them from state and federal antitrust laws that would prohibit such activity, according to a draft reviewed by the Times. 'Fundamentally what this bill seeks to do is empower rideshare drivers to advocate for better working conditions,' Wicks said in an interview. The proposal does not include food delivery drivers. The exact process of how collective bargaining would be overseen by the state is not outlined in the proposal. Wicks and Berman said that they expect those details to be hashed out during the legislative process, with conversations from all stakeholders, including drivers, ride-hailing companies and Service Employees International Union California, which is backing the bill. Typically, antitrust laws would prevent collective action by independent contractors. For example, Seattle faced litigation when it attempted to establish a driver bargaining model through a local ordinance in 2015. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and an Uber subsidiary successfully challenged the law, arguing that bargaining by independent-contractor drivers amounted to illegal concerted action and price fixing. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit disagreed with the city's position that it had created a state-supervised regulatory program, finding that it was not exempt from antitrust law. Drivers for Uber and Lyft are considered independent contractors under a voter-approved state law — Proposition 22 — that went into effect in late 2020. The law originally had barred collective bargaining over drivers' compensation, benefits and working conditions, but an appeals court struck down the provision, arguing it inappropriately limited the California Legislature's authority. The state Supreme Court in a ruling last year largely upheld Proposition 22 but did not address the collective bargaining provision. SEIU California contends that the Legislature has the authority to allow drivers to collectively bargain, based on the appeals court ruling. However, if the bill is ultimately approved by lawmakers, it's possible ride-hailing companies might challenge it. 'A union is the only pathway for 600,000 rideshare drivers to improve their pay and working conditions under Prop 22,' said Tia Orr, executive director of SEIU California, in an emailed statement. Uber and Lyft representatives said the companies opposed the proposal, arguing it would make rides more costly for consumers and go against the will of voters who approved Proposition 22. 'At a time when families' budgets in California are stretched to the max, this proposal would make trips even more expensive,' said Uber spokesperson Zahid Arab in an email. Lyft spokesperson Shadawn Reddick-Smith said Proposition 22 is drivers 'preferred way to structure benefits and protections.' The California proposal is similar to a ballot initiative approved by Massachusetts voters in the fall that was also backed by the Service Employees International Union — as well as the International Assn. of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. Uber and Lyft did not oppose the Massachusetts initiative. Minnesota lawmakers proposed a similar bill in February, and unions in Illinois have begun a campaign to unionize drivers in the state, with Uber agreeing to refrain from interfering with the effort. 'This isn't coming out of left field, ' Berman said. 'It aligns with our values in California to make sure drivers get the rights they deserve.'
