By on November 4, 2020

Uber and Lyft stocks saw a bump this week after California passed a ballot measure that will exempt them (and similar businesses) from a state law requiring contracted drivers to be reclassified as employees.

App-based work platforms bent over backward and expended millions to ensure Proposition 22 passed in November, with many suggesting it was the only way to continue operations in the state. It seems those efforts weren’t for nothing. With over 80 percent of votes counted this morning, the California Secretary of State’s Office announced that 58 percent of voters supported the measure with 42 percent against. Ride-hailing platforms will be legally exempt from California’s Assembly Bill 5 and drivers will remain contracted employees.

Despite having spent a literal fortune ($200 million) on getting Prop 22 passed, the victory ensures firms like Uber, Lyft, Postmates, Instacart, and DoorDash will save millions in the state by nature of not having to issue the kinds of benefits to drivers. Previous estimates placed Uber alone saving nearly 80 million annually by not having to classify more California-based employees as … well, employees.

On the upside, those firms had been planning major staffing cuts had Prop 22 failed. Some outfits even suggested they’d have to abandon the state if they were forced to pay benefits  e.g. unemployment insurance, minimum wage, healthcare, and workers’ compensation. But contractors are supposed to become eligible for smaller healthcare allowances and a minimum stipend based on hours worked under AB5, even with Prop 22 passing.

[Image: Jonathan Weiss/Shutterstock]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

16 Comments on “Uber, Lyft Win in California: Drivers to Remain Contractors...”


  • avatar
    jkross22

    “Uber, Lyft Win in California: Drivers to Remain Contracted Employees”

    I don’t believe they will be considered contracted employees but rather contractors. That distinction was what this initiative was about.

  • avatar
    Ol Shel

    You don’t support them as ‘disrupters’ destroy their careers.

    They won’t support you when the ‘disrupters’ come for your career.

    It’s a race to the bottom; Join it!

  • avatar
    -Nate

    Another failure to protect the working class .

    Rejoice boot lickers, sooner or later they’ll get to you too .

    -Nate

    • 0 avatar
      stuki

      People competent enough to do productive work, don’t need to be “protected” by ambulance chasers, taxfeeders and other rabble who are not.

      Instead, all they “need”, is to be left alone to route around the deadweights.

  • avatar
    RHD

    The drivers got screwed. As “independent contractors”, they pay 15.3% Social Security and Medicare off the top. They don’t get compensation for driving to wherever their fare is waiting for them. They aren’t independent of driving private taxis, because they desperately need the income to get by. All the Uber and Lyft drivers that I have spoken with make around the minimum wage, and all-too-often less than that.
    Uber and Lyft now can avoid paying worker’s comp insurance and unemployment insurance. Why do they deserve those tax breaks? When someone gets badly injured driving, their insurance will have to foot the bill… and the driver’s (and your and my) rates will go up.
    Too bad Uber and Lyft couldn’t have spent that 200 million on making life just a bit easier for the workers who actually do the heavy lifting.
    When there’s a ridiculous amount of money being spent on political advertising, the best thing to do is to vote against it. The manipulation is there to protect the interests of the wealthy, against the interests of the vast majority of the populace.

    • 0 avatar
      Slocum

      None of these folks were born into a caste of Uber drivers — destined forever to either drive or die. They used to do other things, and they could do other things in the future (and most probably will). If driving for Uber and Lyft weren’t an attractive option, they wouldn’t do it. What would really have screwed them is if the vote went the other way and Uber/Lyft shut down in CA. Or even if the services weren’t shuttered, the drivers who wanted a part-time, side-hustle when and only when they wanted to do it would have been screwed.

      “They aren’t independent of driving private taxis, because they desperately need the income to get by.”

      There was no such thing as ‘Uber driver’ a few years ago, what did they do ‘way’ back then to get by?

    • 0 avatar
      bullnuke

      Uber and Lyft drivers have made the personal choice to be Uber and Lyft drivers – of all jobs in the world driving
      for Uber and Lyft is far from the last resort in the marketplace. What if these drivers are happy with what they are doing and more or less okay with their position in life? These folks could easily have chosen to work for Walmart, McDonald’s, or Costco where they would not need excess insurance or suffer high fuel costs but would only need to commute to and from work (or use one of California’s vaunted mass transit systems). Workman’s Comp, unemployment insurance? That’s on Walmart/McDonald’s/Costco’s dime. If one doesn’t like where they may be in the world, freedom of choice will lead them toward other perhaps more palatable options.

      • 0 avatar
        Arthur Dailey

        And those who went to work in the match factories, or coal mines or asbestos mines, or uranium mines before employment laws were enacted to protect them also ‘had a choice’.

        People take bad jobs because they need to.

        Employment laws are meant to protect those at the lowest rungs of society. Employment laws set ‘floors’ of minimum protections not ceilings.

        This ‘proposition’ removes many of those protections. And rewards companies that opened up and operated without any regard to existing regulations or rules.

        There is no ‘freedom of choice’ when competition is limited by globalization, access to capital and elected officials protecting the large corporations that help to fund their campaigns and retirements.

  • avatar
    Cicero

    I’m betting that Singaporean rubber wasn’t the OEM tire for that sled.

  • avatar

    To those who are unhappy about passing prop.22. California is the most liberal state in USA. What are you unhappy about? Do you want California to be a communist dictatorship? Left wing liberalism is not good enough?

    • 0 avatar
      SD 328I

      California is the most blue state, but their recent voting record on these propositions could be a who’s who of a conservative vote.

      It’s a state that overwhelmingly voted for Biden, most ethnically diverse, yet they stopped a prop that would have brought back affirmative action, prevented additional property taxes to businesses and sided with business in regards to worker benefits status.

      It’s a blue state, but not quite left wing liberal, at least based on their most recent proposition results.

  • avatar

    BTW we also killed prop.16:

    “Repeals a constitutional provision that made it unlawful for California’s state and local governments to discriminate against or grant preferential treatment to people based on race, ethnicity, national origin or sex.”

    Are you mad?

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • dal20402: They will be selling separate Sport and Sport Touring models, each available with the stick. I’m sure...
  • Drew8MR: Are we sure you’ll be able to pair it with the touring package? Never have been able to before....
  • Kendahl: I suspected the source might be the EPA but the article didn’t say. The EPA and Edmunds tests are both...
  • dukeisduke: Will manufacturers end up scrapping partially built 2021 model cars because of the line shutdowns? Nearly...
  • StudeDude: You’re right. The R1 version was a single 4bbl carb without the supercharger and made 240 HP. That...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber