CA wants the employee tax of course. My HOA recently had to reclassify a contractor as an employee at great expense to us.

“Uber will refuse to comply with a new bill passed in California Wednesday that says they must reclassify their drivers as employees rather than contractors, arguing that drivers aren’t core to its ride-share business model.

Known as AB-5, the bill requires companies in the state - such as Lyft and Uber - to treat workers as employees by providing them with the full benefits and protections the designation necessitates.

Under the motion’s terms, the title of employee must be issued to any worker the company exerts control over in terms of performance of their task, or if the role carried out by the worker is central to the employer’s regular business.

But in a dramatic push-back, Uber’s chief legal officer Tony West voiced confidence over drivers being able to maintain their independent status irrespective of the bill -insisting drivers are not central to the company’s operations…”

https://mol.im/a/7454353

Good. California has been selective about what Federal laws they obey, tell California’s tax and spend state government to screw off.

Either California or an entitled tech darling will get a slap in the face. Either way, it's a win-win.

quote:

From the linked article:

Uber’s chief legal officer Tony West voiced confidence over drivers being able to maintain their independent status irrespective of the bill -insisting drivers are not central to the company’s operations.

I have no dog in this fight and I really do not care about it, but I am amazed at the assertion by the "chief legal officer" that drivers are not central to the company's operations.

Taxi, limo service, ride share, call it what you will, but I would like to know how this genius thinks that a company that offers transportation as the primary service to its customers, can possibly operate without drivers.

Self-driving cars maybe?

^^^^ Uber and Lyft state that they are software platforms that connect riders with independent drivers, and that they perform the billing and collection services, doing all of this for a fee.

Now, admittedly, Uber and Lyft have pretty stringent requirements for car, driving experience, insurance, driving history, etc., etc., they set the terms of compensation, and I think that they can terminate you if you don't drive "enough" for them.

On balance, I think that the ride share companies are at a real risk of losing their battle on this one, both for the current legal tests for "employee" and because of the political imperatives of tax, employee benefits, etc., involved.

Are they going to apply the same reasoning to software companies?

This has three likely outcomes imo:

1) These people will be considered employees. This will come at great expense (not just taxes but HR department, hiring and firing policies, OT provisions, etc) and raise prices quite a bit. Given the price of this, I see it as the least likely.

2) These services will cap drivers at 32 hours/week so they don't have to pay benefits. This is more likely than 1 and it will only serve to hurt the drivers as it limits how much they can drive.

3) Uber and Lyft will completely step out of the driver qualification side of things and let it be a free for all. This would truly make them software only and avoid all the employee BS. This obviously means the quality of service for us as consumers will go down and it will be a crap shoot of who we are riding with. I think this is most likely sadly.

Either way, this won't help anyone.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:
[QUOTE]From the linked article:

Taxi, limo service, ride share, call it what you will, but I would like to know how this genius thinks that a company that offers transportation as the primary service to its customers, can possibly operate without drivers.

Self-driving cars maybe?

I think Chief Legal Officer Tony may just be a genius, and we're thinking the wrong way.

Uber Drivers may be "Travlers" now, and not "drivers". Employees no longer "work" for the company, but have created a joinder.

This may be the company's new training videos-

https://sigforum.com/eve/forums...0601935/m/8270068064

quote:

Originally posted by CPD SIG:
I think Chief Legal Officer Tony may just be a genius, and we're thinking the wrong way.

Uber Drivers may be "Travlers" now, and not "drivers". Employees no longer "work" for the company, but have created a joinder.

This may be the company's new training videos-

https://sigforum.com/eve/forums...0601935/m/8270068064

I wonder if Tony is a sovereign?

Meethinks so.

Most drivers drive for both Uber and Lyft. If either company can cap driving hours at 32 per week to get around labor laws, then I suspect the software will just be changed to stop at 31:59 per week per company. I think it would be rare for any driver to drive more than 64 hours in a week for both companies. Of course, Uber and Lyft would have to "collude" to make this happen to benefit both of them. But I can see it happening. As long as CA always gets the opposite of what it wants, I'm fine with it.

I have defied a few CA laws myself "I will not comply"

Screw all the CA laws.

I think this is great news.

Finally, the Ultra-Liberal Tech Industry in Silicon Valley may have to lie in the bed they've been making for everyone else.

This law isn't just about payroll tax. This is JUSTICE for those at the bottom of the ladder i.e. minimum wage, benefits etc. This is what they've been supportive of and now they're getting it.

I would challenge the following action(s) would wake up a few voters: Uber and Lyft should shut off their service in California for a couple weeks until the companies can come up with a game plan.

When someone accesses the app, the app returns

"Due to the legislators and the governor of California, this service is currently disabled.

Vote wisely friends and users of our services."

The screaming from San Francisco and L.A. will be heard nationwide.

I loved this comment about the new CA law on a Zero Hedge article about it:

quote:

This is great!

Soon California will have no Uber, no Doordash, no Instacart, no Eaze......and the list goes on.

With no way to get food or weed, and no way to go anywhere, Millennials will starve to death in their apartments.

Finally some hope for California. If only stupid excramento had passed a draconian rent control measure 5 years ago, we wouldn't have all those stupid high density housing built up and screwing up the bay area. Too little to late I guess.

Amazing! Uber CEO wants "action" on gun violence.
How would this get done? By passing laws to get it done.
But when a law get enacted that gets into Ubers pockets, they will defy it?
What blatant hypocrisy!
I wont Uber, even if I have to crawl to get to my destination!

.

The background NOT being reported is the CA legislator who submitted the Bill was previously a Union organizer. The story goes, without Uber/Lift drivers being employees they cannot be unionized.

The belief is that the Unions are behind this effort.

Uber's argument is that their "core" business is not transportation ~ their "core" business is the technology of the app on the customer's phone.

A jury will decide if it's Uber's "technology" where it connects drivers with customers is there "core" business or if it is the "ride" that is Uber's "core" business.

For CA, this will affect many companies like Snap-On who sells franchises that sell and deliver tools, FedEx that uses contract drivers to deliver packages, UPS uses owner/operator drivers to deliver packages.

A computer programmer working for a bank can remain as an independent contractor, but can Google, FaceBook, or Twitter hire independent contractors to write code? Under this law, as I read it ~ Nope, not in CA. These jobs will remain, but the job location will be outside of CA.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:
Self-driving cars maybe?

That is their end goal.

Human drivers are simply bridging the current gap in technology.

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:
Self-driving cars maybe?

That is their end goal.

Human drivers are simply bridging the current gap in technology.

Correct

How are insurance companies and independent insurance agents not affected by this bill?

What about contractors and subs?

Seriously WTF

Its rich. Uber defying a law they don't like while demanding more gun control laws be forced on the rest of us.

Nothing like rich liberals.