Why can't we have a new worker classification that allows gig workers to have both the flexibility the job entails + better benefits/protections?
The very idea that health benefits are tied to employment is the real problem. In Canada they aren’t and thus it’s far more reasonable to work as a ride share driver here. If we could go even further and add pharmacare, dental, and even basic income to the services provided by the government, then we could get rid of minimum wage laws as well. When people are truly free to walk away from any job, then the market will decide the appropriate wage. Any job offering truly unacceptable wages at that point becomes a ripe target for automation.
"We’ve spent hundreds of hours meeting with policymakers and labor leaders to craft an alternative proposal for drivers that includes a minimum earnings guarantee, mileage reimbursement, a health care subsidy, and occupational accident insurance, without the negative consequences."
That's what's so disingenuous about this campaign by Uber and Lyft. They're pretending that being an employee would take away all of this flexibility, but the reality is the legislation left that flexibility in place. This is entirely an argument about benefits and protections, but Lyft and Uber are trying to pretend otherwise.
The issue is that they're still considered employees which means predetermined shifts and control rather than fluid supply meeting demand by the minute. This changes the service (which matters more than the price for customers) so that it no longer works at the current scale.
Is there anything in California labour law or AB5 that requires predetermined shifts? What would prevent Uber/Lyft from allowing its now-employees to volunteer for an X-hour shift at any point that demand forecasts suggest it would be useful?
What do you call it when Uber tells an employee where, when and how long to work?