Sick of GIG Greed #NOonProp22 #SickOfGigGreed
Sick of GIG Greed #NOonProp22 #SickofGigGreed


Bankrupting California

What happens when Uber and Lyft are allowed to write their own rules with no regard for their workers?

Workers lose their safety net
Misclassifying employees means denying access to basic workplace protections.   When gig companies cheat the system workers lose out on critical benefits like unemployment insurance and paid sick days.

Taxpayers are on the hook
When billion-dollar employers like Uber and Lyft skip out of their responsibilities, state and local taxpayers are on the hook and communities and families suffer when employees can’t take sick days.

Billions in profits for Uber and Lyft…

…and billions in liabilities for state and local budgets.  Now that the big gig companies are trying to literally re-write the law to create their own special exemptions, the choice couldn’t be more clear.

Vote no on Prop. 22 to protect drivers and customers (Op-Ed)

San Francisco Chronicle 

San Francisco has a proud history of standing up for working families. But now Uber, Lyft and others are attempting to use a deceptive statewide ballot proposition, Proposition 22, to force us to stand down. For more than a decade, this city has been on the forefront of workers’ rights. To protect workers from falling into abject poverty, San Francisco mandates a minimum wage higher than the state’s and pegs it to inflation. In 2006, we were the first city in the nation to require employers with 10 or more workers to provide up to nine days of paid sick leave. And when the COVID-19 pandemic struck, I worked with my colleagues to protect workers and the people they serve. We passed ordinances providing up to two weeks of emergency leave to workers affected by the virus and a requirement that app-based delivery employers, like DoorDash or Postmates, provide workers with personal protective equipment.

Share this:

Veena Dubal: Why Uber and Lyft are taking a page out of big tobacco’s playbook in labor law battle

The Guardian – UK

Uber and Lyft are waging a scorched-earth regulatory battle to avoid providing basic benefits to their drivers, now considered essential workers, in their largest US market: California. In response to a lawsuit by the California attorney general, Xavier Becerra, a judge found the companies’ drivers to be employees and ordered Uber and Lyft to act accordingly – including by providing a living wage, unemployment benefits, state-mandated sick leave and full reimbursements for expenses like cleaning and personal protective equipment. The companies have responded by threatening to lay off tens of thousands of workers. Their goal is to extend the crisis until November, when Proposition 22, a referendum written and sponsored by the gig companies, will be voted on. Prop 22 would create a special exemption from California employment laws just for these companies, while also pre-empting local regulation. The companies have taken a page from big tobacco’s political playbook to avoid complying with wage laws and basic aspects of the social safety net in exchange for the labor of their majority immigrant and people-of-color workforce.

Share this:

Press Release 8/13/20: Spoiler Alert: Uber and Lyft Have Always Used Shutdown Threats to Bully Their Way to Higher Profits at Drivers’ Expense

Sacramento, CA – After the Los Angeles Times reported on Uber and Lyft’s threat to shutdown California operations rather than comply with a judge’s orders to follow the law, the No on Prop 22 campaign released Uber’s record of bluffing its way out of fair treatment of drivers in jurisdictions across California.  Spoiler: Uber has returned to reap its profits from drivers’ exploitation time and again. 

Jurisdictions Where Uber has Threatened to Leave, But NEVER Did:

●      New York – In 2015, Uber threatened to leave New York City over a dispute with the City Council, but never left.

●      Austin, TX – In 2016, Uber and Lyft threatened to leave the Austin, TX market if local voters failed to approve a measure it put on the ballot to loosen background check restrictions. The companies returned just six months later.

●      Chicago, IL – In 2016, Uber threatened to abandon the Chicago market to avoid having to comply with the city’s licensing regulations, and Lyft joined in. Neither company ever left.  

●      Phoenix SkyHarbor Airport – In February this year, Uber and Lyft threatened to stop picking up at Phoenix’s SkyHarbor airport if an increased airport pickup fee was allowed to stand. The fee went into effect on May 1 of this year. As of today, neither company has left the market.  

“Using the livelihood of countless workers and their families as a political bargaining chip is a grim but all-too-familiar ploy for Uber and Lyft,” said Art Pulaski, Executive Secretary Treasurer of the California Labor Federation. “Uber and Lyft are sitting on billions of dollars in cash on hand that they could use to follow the law immediately and reclassify their workers as employees. Instead, they’re going back to their tired playbook of threatening the very workers whose tireless efforts have turned app executives into billionaires. Time and again in other states we’ve seen these threats evaporate as soon as the companies get what they want. In California we stand for workers and what’s right: an equal playing field for all. Voting NO on Prop 22 will finally hold these companies accountable to doing what so many other profitable businesses in California do every day– following the damn law.”

Earlier this week, after being ordered by a judge to immediately comply with the law requiring Uber and Lyft to treat drivers as employees, Uber’s CEO went back to an all-too-familiar scheme. He ran to cable news, announcing the company’s plan to put hundreds of thousands of drivers out of work just to avoid having to pay them fair wages and benefits like healthcare, paid sick leave, and unemployment insurance.  The threat is a clear attempt to bully voters to support Prop 22, the initiative the companies wrote and paid to get on the November ballot to exempt ONLY APP companies from the very same law the judge ordered them to follow. 

Share this:

No on 22 Campaign Op-Ed: CA voters must stop app-company scheme to profit at workers’ expense

Modesto Bee

The COVID-19 pandemic is showing us the best and worst of the gig economy. The best: drivers and shoppers becoming first responders to keep home-bound seniors fed and transport nurses to work. The worst: app companies like Uber, Lyft and Doordash buying themselves a special exemption on the November ballot to deny employees sick pay, unemployment leave, and the protective equipment employers are required to provide under California law.

Share this:

California’s Gig Economy Ballot Measure Fails Workers, Labor Groups Say

Bloomberg CityLab

A California ballot measure supported by ride-hailing and delivery companies would lower workers’ wages and limit the power of legislators to institute new labor protections, according to a new report from two labor advocacy groups. Proposition 22, known as the “Protect App-Based Drivers and Services Act,” would not only roll back existing rights, but also require a 7/8 majority of state legislators to approve any future amendments, researchers at the National Employment Law Project and the Partnership for Working Families found. 

Share this:

Gig Workers Face Shifting Roles, Competition in Pandemic

Associated Press

There were the two-hour, unpaid waits outside supermarkets when San Francisco first started to lock down, on top of the heavy shopping bags that had to be lugged up countless flights of stairs. And yet even after signing up for several apps, 39-year-old Saori Okawa still wasn’t making as much money delivering meals and groceries as she did driving for ride-hailing giant Uber before the pandemic struck. 

Share this:

NYT Endorses “NO” Vote on App Company Initiative

Capitol Morning Report

Opponents of a proposed ballot measure that would change employment classification rules for app-based drivers report “New York Times Editorial Board tells Californians vote ‘No’ on Uber, Lyft, Doordash’s November initiative;” say Times described measure as being “designed primarily to protect the companies from properly paying for their legion of workers” and it was published “just days after Attorney General Xavier Becerra and three California city attorneys asked a court to immediately force app companies to classify their drivers as employees in accordance with California law.” 

Share this:

Press Release 6/29/20: Assembly Speaker to Uber, Lyft, and Doordash: Stop Exploiting Workers for Profit

Sacramento, CA — Today the Speaker of the California State Assembly, Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood), endorsed a “NO” position against the deceptive Uber, Lyft, and Doordash initiative that will appear on the ballot in November. 

“This app-company initiative is a cynical attempt by billion-dollar corporations to continue exploiting their workers for profit. No more,” said Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon. “No more denying drivers the basic protections they’ve earned, like health care, unemployment insurance, and paid sick leave. This November, Californians can finally take action to stand with workers and hold gig company CEOs accountable to follow the law by voting NO on their misguided initiative.”

The app companies wrote their measure and paid to put it on the ballot for one reason only: so they can boost their profits by continuing to unfairly deny their drivers the wages, paid sick leave, and unemployment benefits they’ve earned.Instead of playing by the same rules as all other businesses by classifying their workers as employees instead of contractors and treating them fairly – Uber, Lyft, and Doordash are hoping voters will give them a free pass to circumvent the law. Rejecting their initiative by voting NO will protect the rights of app drivers to minimum wage, overtime, breaks, paid sick leave, healthcare, unemployment insurance, and workers’

Share this:

Response from California State Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez to Eric Shapiro’s open letter calling for repeal of AB5

The Milpitas Beat

This message is in response to the piece you wrote and published in your news outlet the Milpitas Beat–“Open letter to California State Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez: Repeal AB5 right this second.” 

Share this:

SF DA Files Legal Action Against Food Delivery App DoorDash

Bay City News

San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin announced Tuesday his office has filed legal action against app-based food delivery service DoorDash, accusing the company of illegally misclassifying its employees. 

Share this: