First design
Site theme
Sign up or log in to sign up for discussions!
A California ruling granted Uber and Lyft a state of emergency that opposes an order requiring them to treat their drivers as employees. The companies faced a deadline on Thursday to comply with the order. Earlier in the day, Lyft announced that she would be forced to close her doors in the state tonight.
Lyft said she was forced to close its California operations under a 2019 California law, AB 5, which requires ride-sharing corporations to treat their drivers as workers who as independent contractors. Uber had warned that it would probably do the same if the courts did not stop the application.
“This is not something we seek to do because we know that millions of Californians have Lyft for their must-have travels,” Lyft wrote. However, the corporation said the new law would “require a review of the entire business style; it’s not a transfer that can be transferred overnight.”
The judge’s emergency suspension means that Lyft and Uber will continue to operate in their current style as they proceed to question whether the new law applies to them.
Lyft and Uber have historically treated their drivers as independent contractors, meaning their drivers have not earned benefits such as minimum wage, expense compensation, unemployment insurance and payment.
Uber’s chief executive warns that California’s resolution could force a month-to-month shutdown. The current style is smart for Uber and Lyft, and corporations say many drivers also enjoy the freedom it offers. Uber and Lyft drivers can connect to the app whenever and wherever they want, paint as long as they want, and then log out. They can also paint for corporations simultaneously.
This has transparent benefits over maximum traditional jobs, where staff are expected to be dedicated in advance to paint at a specific time. Many Uber and Lyft drivers cite this flexibility as one of the main reasons they decide on this line of paints.
Critics point out that there is nothing in labor law that requires employers to set constant schedules for their workers. That’s technically true, but Uber has argued that making drivers workers erode the autonomy that today’s drivers do.
In a blog post, Uber economist Alison Stein writes:
There is no giant company in the state of California or, indeed, anywhere else in the country, where hourly painters can paint as drivers do lately with Uber. “Starbucks offers one of the most flexible part-time jobs, however, baristas can’t just come in unexpectedly, make the decision that they’ll only make slats by rejecting all orders for cappuccinos, leaving the morning rush to pick up their child from school. (without your boss’s permission) and repaint in a Peet café.
Imagine a place to eat that gives your painters the same freedoms that drivers have lately with Uber,” he added. Each night, a single server can pay to serve a hundred consumers or a hundred servers to serve a customer. ready a plate, the chef can spend cooking for the food truck across the street. And every time their painters were at work, they had to be paid, whether they had paintings to make or the place to eat was closed.
At a minimum, Lyft and Uber say higher operating service prices will force them to increase rates and service areas. Some consumers will be charged, so there will be fewer paints to make.
Ultimately, this is a factor that will pass through the California electorate in November. Uber and Lyft sponsored an electoral initiative that would give ride-sharing drivers some, but not all, employee rights, while retaining the maximum flexibility of independent contracts.
Join the Ars Orbital Transmission email for weekly updates in your inbox.