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


Press Release 8/12/20: Amid Record Job Losses, Uber Threatens to Slash Tens of Thousands of Jobs, Rather Than Comply with the Law

Sacramento, CA — Uber’s CEO today threatened to shut down its business operations in California until November. The No on Prop. 22 campaign called Uber’s threat to leave California exactly what it is: more of the same from a company that has refused time and time again to put the needs of their drivers above their bottom line. They refuse to follow the law or any court decision that goes against them, as the San Francisco Superior Court did this week.

“Uber’s threat to heap even more hardship on tens of thousands of employees rather than comply with the law is stunning, but unfortunately not surprising given the company has been compiling a rap sheet of legal evasion since the day it started in California,” said Art Pulaski, Executive Secretary Treasurer of the California Labor Federation. “Judge after judge has told Uber that even the company’s billions of dollars can’t buy a free pass from following California law – but Uber refuses to listen.  When Californians vote NO on Prop. 22 they’ll make it clear that Uber, Lyft and Doordash can’t use the ballot box to buy a special exemption from the law, either.”

The threat lodged by Uber’s CEO came just two days after San Francisco Superior Court Judge Schulman said Uber’s argument that the company is above the law “flies in the face of economic reality and common sense.”

“To state the obvious, drivers are central, not tangential, to Uber and Lyft’s entire ride-hailing business,” Schulman said in his order requiring the companies to comply with the law and classify rideshare drivers as employees with all of the benefits to which they are entitled under California law. The judge went on to dismiss Uber and Lyft’s assertions that they should be allowed to continue breaking the law pending the outcome of their attempt to buy a special exemption from it on the November ballot, saying, “That Uber and Lyft are attempting to persuade voters to change the law, an effort that may or may not succeed, is no grounds for this Court to refrain from deciding the issues before it” and “Defendants are not entitled to an indefinite postponement of their day of reckoning.”

Share this: