The Next Battleground for Gig Worker Labor Laws: Massachusetts

Lower than two years after a fierce election battle in California, gig firms like Uber and Lyft are once more colliding with labor teams, politicians and the courts over a poll measure in Massachusetts that may protect the impartial standing of drivers for the businesses.

The Massachusetts proposition would assure employees a minimal wage however restrict their entry to different advantages provided to common staff, much like the poll measure in California. And as in California, state judges might thwart the multimillion-dollar marketing campaign being waged by gig firms.

A Massachusetts court docket has questioned whether or not the gig-work proposition violates state regulation, and there’s a likelihood the November poll measure could possibly be thrown out this summer season.

The battle comes as state politicians from Massachusetts and different states ratchet up the strain on ride-hailing and food-delivery firms whereas calling for a broader reassessment of whether or not the gig financial system exploits those that work in it.

On Wednesday, 5 U.S. senators and three members of the Home, together with a number of from Massachusetts, despatched letters to numerous gig firms, criticizing them for what the lawmakers say is their observe of misclassifying staff as impartial contractors. The lawmakers are additionally demanding that the businesses launch detailed studies describing the risks that drivers face after a report from Gig Employees Rising, an advocacy group, discovered that no less than 50 have been killed on the job within the final 5 years.

Uber and Lyft have every launched studies on assaults and different critical incidents that occurred on their platforms, however the lawmakers, who’re asking for a response by June 21, are calling for extra particulars, in addition to for firms like DoorDash to do the identical. In addition they wrote that they wished details about whether or not the gig firms compensated drivers who have been attacked or helped their households with funeral providers and different prices.

Lawmakers stated a scarcity of security for drivers and their impartial contractor standing have been associated.

“Drivers are solely put at higher threat as a result of they’ve low pay, low wages, that pushes them to work longer hours and that pushes them to just accept extra rides, even after they really feel unsafe,” Consultant Ayanna Pressley, Democrat of Massachusetts, stated in an interview.

In a press release, a DoorDash spokeswoman stated the letters made “deceptive and inaccurate claims,” and the corporate was dedicated to retaining its drivers secure. Different gig firms didn’t instantly reply to requests for remark.

Gig firms spent $200 million preventing for his or her drivers to be labeled as impartial contractors in California. The battle began in 2019 when California handed a regulation requiring firms like Uber and Lyft to deal with their drivers as staff. The state’s lawyer normal later sued the gig firms to implement it, and so they responded by threatening to go away the state.

The 2020 poll measure, Proposition 22, handed with about 59 p.c of the vote, which means gig drivers would stay impartial contractors. However final 12 months, a California decide threw out the brand new regulation. That case is pending an attraction.

Ms. Pressley argued that the Massachusetts poll measure was a approach for gig firms to economize by avoiding giving their drivers extra money and advantages like well being protection. “All of that is finally a prioritization about revenue over individuals,” she stated.

Proponents of the poll measure say it might as a substitute be certain that employees obtained a good minimal wage and a few advantages whereas sustaining drivers’ means to decide on after they labored. Below the proposal, the drivers would make no less than $18 per hour whereas actively delivering meals or ferrying passengers.

It might additionally give restricted advantages, like a per-mile payment for car prices, accident insurance coverage, paid sick time and well being care stipends for employees who spent a sure variety of hours driving. Gig firms wouldn’t have to offer unemployment insurance coverage, employees’ compensation, paid day without work or some other well being care funds.

Conor Yunits, who’s main the Massachusetts Coalition for Impartial Work, the marketing campaign in assist of the poll measure, stated many drivers didn’t need to be labeled as staff as a result of that may restrict their means to set their very own hours.

“It’s about their lives, about having flexibility, the flexibility to be their very own bosses, set their very own schedules,” stated Mr. Yunits, senior vp at Points Administration Group. “The actual fact is, drivers assist this. In the end, we consider voters will assist this.”

Opponents of the poll measure be aware that drivers would solely be compensated at that fee whereas finishing a job and never whereas ready for his or her subsequent rider. Factoring in that lag time, one examine has estimated drivers might make solely $5 to $7 per hour. (Mr. Yunits referred to as the examine “pure marketing campaign propaganda.”)

Opponents additionally say drivers ought to already be receiving advantages given to staff. In 2020, Maura Healey, Massachusetts’ lawyer normal, sued Uber and Lyft in an effort to pressure them to acknowledge their drivers are staff beneath state regulation. That lawsuit is pending in court docket.

If the poll measure overcomes opposition from distinguished unions and politicians in Massachusetts, a staunchly pro-labor state, it might embolden the gig firms to proceed their state-by-state method to codifying their guidelines for drivers.

“We’re gearing up for the battle,” stated Wes McEnany, who leads Massachusetts Is Not for Sale, a marketing campaign opposing the proposal.

The controversy might quickly be moot. In Could, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court docket heard arguments from a bunch suing to cease the poll measure, and expressed issues that the gig firms have been attempting to sneak a seemingly unrelated rule previous voters.

A piece of the proposed poll measure says drivers are “not an worker or agent” of the gig firms. The measure’s opponents say which means firms like Uber are attempting to make sure they can’t be held chargeable for the actions of their drivers in accidents or crimes.

Below state regulation, if the court docket finds that one part of the measure is unrelated to the remainder of it — because it indicated it’d throughout the listening to in Could — it may throw out the poll proposal.

Voters “could have completely completely different views about whether or not a gig employee ought to have all these advantages versus whether or not they can sue the corporate if there’s an accident or a rape,” Choose Scott Kafker, an affiliate justice, stated throughout the listening to. “These are very completely different points, aren’t they?”

A lawyer defending the poll measure argued that these points each involved a employee’s relationship with an organization and have been associated.

A court docket choice is predicted in late June or early July. It’s additionally doable that the State Legislature might move a regulation much like the poll measure within the coming months, making a vote in November pointless, although that prospect seems unlikely.

If the court docket permits the poll measure to be put to voters, the proponents might have some benefits. Uber, Lyft, DoorDash and Instacart raised $17.8 million to again the poll measure final 12 months, in accordance with the state’s Workplace of Marketing campaign and Political Finance, which hasn’t launched totals for 2022. Most of that was a $13 million Lyft contribution in December, which seems to be the biggest single political contribution in Massachusetts historical past.

Massachusetts Is Not for Sale raised lower than $1 million final 12 months. The group stated it had discovered from the California battle that voters could possibly be confused by the trivia of an advanced poll measure about impartial contractors, so an enormous focus of the marketing campaign can be arguing that massive tech firms are attempting to rewrite state legal guidelines.

“California needed to go first and bought caught a bit of flat-footed,” Mr. McEnany stated. “I believe we now have the hindsight, taking a look at California and having the ability to see it coming, we have been in a position to construct a coalition loads earlier.”

Gig firms say additionally they have drivers on their aspect. The Massachusetts Coalition for Impartial Work cites a survey of about 400 Massachusetts drivers this 12 months, paid for by the gig firms, by which 81 p.c backed the poll measure.

The surveyed drivers have been informed {that a} sure vote would classify drivers as impartial contractors, moderately than staff, and supply new advantages, and {that a} no vote would preserve the established order.

Opponents say that drivers are being misled, and that they may each preserve versatile schedules and obtain larger pay and advantages in the event that they have been labeled as staff.

“This half-measure just isn’t sufficient,” stated Senator Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, who signed the letters to gig firms about employee security. “The reply is to categorise these employees as staff and pay them a dwelling wage and provides them actual advantages.”