Posted on 12/12/2019 9:56:12 AM PST by karpov
...
AB 5 has sent shock waves through the world of companies that employ freelancers and the independent workers whom they rely on since it passed. The law codifies the ABC test — which helps employers determine who should be classified as a freelancer — giving exemptions to some types of freelancers, such as architects, doctors, insurance agents, lawyers, grant writers, real estate agents, tutors, truck drivers and manicurists.
The law, which takes effect Jan.1, 2020, could cost the employers a lot of money. It says the exemptions are retroactive. The California Supreme Court just announced this week it will make a decision on whether the ABC test applies to contractor relationships prior to April 30, 2019, before the California Supreme Court opted to use the ABC test in the court case Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles.
It has many unicorns, including Lyft, DoorDash, Instacart and Uber worried about their business model scrambling to launch a voter initiative to roll back the effects of AB 5. The statewide measure, the Protect App-Based Drivers & Services Act, proposed for a November 2020 ballot, would give ride-share drivers and couriers an earnings guarantee of at least 120% of minimum wage and certain benefits and protections but allow them to remain independent contractors who set their own work hours.
Franchisors are also worried that their franchisees could be reclassified from their traditional designation as independent contractors to employees. The International Franchise Association lobbied to get an exclusion from the law, but it wasn’t granted.
“I don’t believe legislators realized the impact this had,” says Gene Zaino, founder and executive chairman of MBO Partners, which studies the freelance economy and provides back-office services to freelancers. “This was really designed to create a safety net for people that needed it.’”
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
“I don’t believe legislators realized the impact this had...” They never do. And they never care.
“Yet another failure of socialism.”
It’s only a failure if this is an unintended consequence of this law. And that may not be the case.
The 3rd world socialists running California are hostile to business, and particularly the kind of small business that is free from heavy regulation.
Big corporations love stomping the little guy with big socialist government help.
California legislators giving da business to California business.. Business as usual.
If this state could implode from corruption, it would.
California legislators giving da business to California business.. Business as usual.
If this state could implode from corruption, it would.
Owner/Operators of trucks are getting squeezed.
The affected may complain but will still vote for Democraps next election.
There is NO connecting the dots for these legislators or their voters
Thanks a lot, you farging iceholes, from those who are on a meager fixed income, disabled and dependent on services such as Instacart as their only means of getting groceries.
This has a creepy feel to it, as if legislators are some kind of super-humans who would never do something bad unless something derails their heroic attempts at fixing all our lives. I have news for you, Gene. The class of taxpayer-supported leeches known as legislators are perfectly capable of not caring about bad side effects, of doing things that are just plain stupid, of doing things to advance an agenda that helps them and not you. If you work for a living, they're no smarter than you are, and most likely less so.
Pelham wrote: “The 3rd world socialists running California are hostile to business, and particularly the kind of small business that is free from heavy regulation.”
Has nothing to do with regulation and everything to do with unionization. If independent contractors belonged to unions, this law would never have been passed.
Most laws that carve out exceptions that merely establish protected groups that otherwise are no different than everyone else, are usually ethically and morally wrong to begin with. If the idea is “right” then why isn’t it univerally right. The answer is political. They need some of the population to support the law, against the others to whom the law will apply, so enough votes have to be bought to get the law passed, which would be impossible if it was going to be applied universally.
You have to understand what laws are for in californication. Propose anything controversial and then milk contributions galiore from all sides. This is why crooks pay millions of dollars for a temporary $174,009 job. Sell your votes to the highest bidder but be sure to collect ALL bribes from all sides FIRST.
It doesn’t affect the state. When I run a dozer under contract for Cal Fire, I am doing precisely what full-time firefighters do but as a freelance contractor. If the government had to abide by the inane laws they pass, they might not pass so many.
They knew exactly what they were doing, they wanted to destroy Uber.
Is this just a rehash of the 1099 vs W2 question?
Exactly... and I would state they are most hostile to non union jobs.
Uber didn't pay up, too bad for them.
The ones getting exemptions are the ones paying tribute.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.