Massachusetts’ top court has paved the way for voters to decide the classification of gig drivers for app-based companies such as Uber Technologies and Lyft. On Thursday, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rejected a labor-supported challenge to a proposal backed by an industry coalition to classify these drivers as independent contractors. This classification would grant drivers certain new benefits without recognizing them as legal employees.

According to Reuters, the court will allow a competing ballot measure that aims to permit these drivers to unionize to proceed. The decision arrives just before closing arguments on Friday in an ongoing lawsuit brought by the state’s Democratic attorney general. The lawsuit accuses Uber and Lyft of misclassifying their drivers as contractors rather than employees for several years.

If the industry loses both in court and at the ballot box, Uber and Lyft could face significant changes to their business models. Lawyers representing Uber and Lyft have warned that such changes could force the companies to reduce or even cease operations in Massachusetts. To support the ballot proposal that would solidify drivers’ status as contractors under state law, Uber, Lyft, and app-based delivery services like Instacart and DoorDash have invested millions of dollars.

Read more: Uber Raises Minimum Wage for Drivers in France Amid Gig Economy Regulation

Studies indicate that using contractors can reduce costs for companies by as much as 30% compared to hiring employees. The ballot measure committee Flexibility and Benefits for Massachusetts Drivers, which includes contributions from the four ride-share companies, is also proposing to set an earnings floor for app-based drivers. Additionally, the proposal includes provisions for healthcare stipends, occupational accident insurance, and paid sick leave.

Meanwhile, a separate proposed ballot measure, backed by the Service Employees International Union’s Local 32BJ, seeks voter approval to allow Uber and Lyft drivers to unionize. This dueling measure highlights the ongoing debate over worker rights and classification in the gig economy.

Source: Reuters

CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — A private school teacher who says she was fired after driving an 18-year-old student to get an abortion is suing New Hampshire’s Department of Education and officials she says falsely suggested she circumvented state law.

New Hampshire law requires parents to receive written notice at least 48 hours before an abortion is performed on an unemancipated minor. But in this case, the student wasn’t living with her parents and was a legal adult, according to the lawsuit filed Monday.

The teacher, who filed the suit as “Jane Doe,” said she provided the student with contact information for a community health center last fall when the student disclosed her suspected pregnancy and later gave her a ride to the appointment in October. The school fired her within days and referred the matter to the Department of Education, which revoked her teaching license earlier this month.

The lawsuit says the department exceeded its authority and violated her due process rights by revoking her credentials without a fair and impartial process. And it accuses Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut of pushing a false narrative of her conduct via an opinion piece he published in April.

The essay, titled “Thank God Someone is Looking Out for the Children,” was published in response to New Hampshire Public Radio reports critical of the commissioner. In it, Edelblut asked rhetorically whether the department should “turn a blind eye” when “allegedly, an educator lies by calling in sick so they can take a student – without parental knowledge – to get an abortion.”

According to the lawsuit, department officials knew for months prior to the essay’s publication that the student in question was an adult and thus not subject to the parental notification law.

Kimberly Houghton, spokesperson for the department, declined to comment on its investigation of the teacher and referred questions about the lawsuit to the attorney general’s office. Michael Garrity, spokesperson for that agency, said Wednesday that officials are reviewing it and will respond in due course. Attorneys for the teacher did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The teacher’s firing was first reported last week by The Boston Globe, based on investigatory records it requested from the Education Department. The lawsuit said the department’s “biased and stilted disclosure” of information that should have remained confidential until the case was settled created a misleading narrative that damaged the teacher’s reputation and put her at risk.

A hearing is scheduled for July 3, five days before the teacher is set to begin a new job.

TRENTON, N.J. — New Jersey lawmakers are poised to send a $56.6 billion fiscal year 2025 budget to Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy this week, hiking taxes on high-earning businesses and funding for many state services and programs.

The annual spending plan is expected to get enough votes in the Democrat-led Legislature on Friday to reach Murphy’s desk. The state constitution requires a balanced budget to be enacted by July 1.

Here’s a closer look at what’s in the budget, which would spend 4.2% more than the plan Murphy signed last year.

ARE THERE ANY NEW TAXES?

Yes. The budget calls for increasing the state’s corporation business tax on companies that make more than $10 million a year. The current 9% rate would climb to 11.5%. Business groups say that would give New Jersey the nation’s highest tax rate and punish the state’s best corporate citizens.

WHY ARE TAXES GOING UP?

The higher rate was first proposed by Murphy as part of his budget proposal early this year to help New Jersey Transit. He’s billing the levy as a corporate transit fee to help the beleaguered agency, which has regularly had to use capital funds to help finance projects.

Critics note that the revenue won’t go to transit until next year. The current budget keeps it in the general fund, so when the money goes to transit next year, whatever is being paid for now out of the general would need to be replenished or cut, those critics say.

ARE THERE OTHER TAX CHANGES?

Yes. The budget calls for ending a sales tax holiday on school supplies that had gone into effect around the start of the academic year. That cut was first introduced in 2022 when the Democrats who control state government aimed to show voters they were making the state more affordable. Lawmakers didn’t explain this cut when they unveiled the budget Wednesday, but the additional revenue could help balance the budget.

WHAT ABOUT PROPERTY TAXES?

New Jersey has among the nation’s highest property taxes, levied by local governments to finance services and schools. The state dedicates some income tax revenue to fund local governments, which helps keep property tax rates from growing even higher. This budget calls for increasing state K-12 funding to fully implement an aid formula ratified by the state Supreme Court, raising such aid to more than $11 billion, up nearly $1 billion from the current fiscal year. The budget also has about $2.5 billion for direct property tax relief, continuing programs introduced in 2022 and 2023 to help residents, renters and seniors. The average property tax amount in 2022, which is the most recently available information, is about $9,500, according to the state.

WHAT ELSE IS IN THE BUDGET?

Quite a bit, given it funds all aspects of state government, from the executive departments to public colleges and universities, to the Legislature itself, which this year passed a 67% pay raise for lawmakers, their first since 2002, which goes into effect in 2026. Overall, spending is up just over 4% compared with the current fiscal year budget.

It includes a number of expenditures — sometimes referred to as Christmas tree line items because they’re viewed as gifts for specific constituencies. They include funding for ending homelessness, helping people re-enter society from prison, fire departments, arts programs and one city’s effort to teach life skills through tennis.

Republican lawmakers said they barely had time to review the budget and lamented that they weren’t sure what all was in it. Even Democratic Senate Budget Committee Chairman Paul Sarlo said the document is too vast to read line by line, but he supports it overall.

“I could not take a test and be quizzed on every line item because it would take hours and hours and days and months,” Sarlo said. “I try to look at it in totality and that’s where I think we’re at.”