San Jose mayor launches fight against state carpooling



[ad_1]

When Uber and Lyft this week threatened to cease operations in California due to state law to reclassify performing workers, San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo joined the ranks of a counterpart Republican to take a stand.

Liccardo said he entered the debate because the departure of the ride-sharing giants in the state would hurt workers even more during the current economic crisis.

“We need to move beyond the rigid dichotomy between employer and independent contractor,” Liccardo told the San José Spotlight on August 21. “It’s a 19th century model that no longer works in a 21st century economy.

In a joint statement with San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer, Liccardo said the vast majority of drivers want to remain self-employed.

Mayors ignored party lines to champion a “portable benefit fund” that would allow workers to raise money on one or more odd jobs to be used for any benefit they needed most, like health care or paid vacation. On August 10, Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi wrote a New York Times review supporting such a system.

“There are too many self-employed workers struggling with inadequate compensation and non-existent retirement and safety net benefits,” Liccardo said. “And we have to do better and we can find a better way. But we don’t need to shut down the odd-job economy to do this. “

An emergency Court of Appeal ruling on August 20 gave ride-sharing giants more time to reclassify drivers as employees rather than independent contractors.

Formal enforcement of AB 5, a state law passed in 2019 requiring reclassification, was due to take place on August 20 for Uber and Lyft, who ignored the warrant for months. A California judge ordered the companies to comply with the law on Aug. 10 and gave them an additional 10 days to appeal the ruling.

The impending deadline has sent businesses into a spiral. To evade the order, Uber and Lyft filed an emergency appeal and threatened to shut down services in California if their appeal was not granted.

“We are pleased that the Court of Appeal has recognized the important issues raised in this case and that access to these essential services will not be interrupted as long as we continue to defend the ability of drivers to work with the freedom they wish, ”Uber said in a statement.

Among workers in the odd-job economy, the debate around AB 5 has been that of freedom versus security.

Edan Alva, a resident of San Jose, is a Lyft driver and organizer with Gig Workers Rising, an app worker rights campaign. He said ridesharing companies are “no different from most criminals” in trying to sidestep the benefits of the AB 5 driver, and the portable benefits are not enough.

“Everyone should get a minimum wage and the basic labor protections that are prescribed by law and are there for a reason,” Alva said. “You don’t want people driving other people who are sick and too poor to see a doctor.”

Alva fell ill in January and did not have enough money to pay the rent, let alone a high medical bill.

“People shouldn’t be in this situation, period. People should have enough space to save for times when they are in some sort of emergency and they have to get over it and not work for a while, ”Alva said. “Maybe even – God forbid – they can take vacations from time to time.”

When the pandemic began, Alva said he was spending all of his $ 5 an hour earnings on cleaning supplies to disinfect his car for passengers. He said he will not resume driving until the virus subsides.

He urges voters to vote no on Proposition 22, a measure slated for the November poll that would classify app-based drivers as independent contractors, battling classifications mandated by AB 5.

Supporters of Prop. 22 and critics of AB 5 advocate the flexibility and freedom that independent contractor status gives to drivers. Uber and Lyft have publicly supported the Prop.22 campaign.

“For several years, we’ve been advocating a way to deliver benefits to drivers who use the Lyft platform – including a guaranteed minimum income and a healthcare subsidy – while maintaining the flexibility and control that entrepreneurs enjoy. independent, ”Lyft said in a blog post. “This is something that drivers have told us over and over again that they want.”

AB 5 exempts certain workers, such as healthcare professionals, barbers and insurance agents, from having to be classified as employees. Because of this, Liccardo said lawmakers should get back to the drawing board.

“The law has already become Swiss cheese,” Liccardo said. “Rather than just thinking about more exemptions and exceptions, shouldn’t we just come to the table and find a better way?”

An appeals court rules on the carpooling issue and will hear pleadings on October 13. If the court does not rule in their favor, companies will need to submit written consent to comply with the law.

Contact Carly Wipf at [email protected] or follow @CarlyChristineW on Twitter.



[ad_2]

Source link