Source Code: Your daily look at what matters in tech.

workplaceworkplaceauthorMegan Rose DickeyNoneYour guide to the new world of work.39cd4d6373
×

Get access to Protocol

Your information will be used in accordance with our Privacy Policy

I’m already a subscriber
Protocol | Workplace

Gig workers are prepping for a $100+ million battle against Uber, Lyft and DoorDash

A coalition of gig workers and labor rights advocates are anticipating that Uber, Lyft and other companies will use their nine-figure playbook from California's Prop. 22 fight.

A car with Uber and Lyft stickers displayed on the front window.

Gig workers are preparing for a battle against tech companies in Massachusetts.

Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Gig workers, labor activists, the NAACP New England chapter and other organizations are teaming up to fight Uber, Lyft and other gig-economy companies in Massachusetts. The group, The Coalition to Protect Workers' Rights, is anticipating a $100 million-plus ballot campaign from gig-economy companies seeking to classify gig workers as independent contractors.

Massachusetts has all the makings of a battle over gig workers: a law that clearly states under what circumstances employers can legally classify workers as independent contractors, a lawsuit from the state's attorney general alleging Uber and Lyft are breaking the law, a bill in the Senate that would give gig-economy companies what they want and two coalitions on either side of the aisle contemplating a potential ballot measure that would put the issue in front of voters.

"We know the way to beat these big tech companies with their endless money is to organize early and to make sure that we're driving an affirmative agenda on this and not allowing the companies to set the terms of the debate," Mike Firestone, director for the Coalition to Protect Workers' Rights, told Protocol. "So that's why we're organizing now, even though they haven't even filed their language."

Firestone said he watched what happened "very carefully" in California, where gig-economy companies spent about $224 million to pass a ballot measure that legally classified gig workers as independent contractors. He said he also paid attention when Uber and Lyft said they would work to bring similar outcomes to other states.

The Massachusetts Coalition for Independent Work, whose members include Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, Instacart and others, is on the opposite side of The Coalition to Protect Workers' Rights. The Uber and Lyft-backed coalition has not yet decided whether it will try to put an initiative on the ballot, but it has until August 4 to file the paperwork, Conor Yunits, a spokesperson for the coalition, told Protocol.

"We are in support of any legislative solution that ultimately allows gig workers to remain independent contractors but also grants them new benefits protections," Yunits said.

The legal landscape

Massachusetts law, similar to what went into effect in California in 2020, applies a three-part ABC test to determine if a worker is an employee or an independent contractor. To legally classify a worker as an independent contractor, an employer must show the worker is free from control, does work outside of the employer's general scope of business and runs their own business doing similar work.

In July 2020, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey filed a lawsuit against Uber and Lyft alleging both companies are misclassifying their drivers as independent contractors. In the complaint, Healey argues Uber and Lyft drivers are not free from direction and control, provide a service that is at the core of each company's business and do not run their own ride-hailing businesses. Uber and Lyft filed to dismiss the case but a judge denied the motion in March.

"The Attorney General's lawsuit is without merit, as drivers who use Lyft's platform are independent contractors under well-settled law," a Lyft spokesperson wrote in a statement to Protocol. "The lawsuit's attempt to force drivers into becoming employees goes directly against what the vast majority say they want. 83% support a model that secures their independence plus provides them new benefits. That's why we are eager to collaborate with lawmakers on a legislative proposal currently before the Massachusetts Legislature that actually reflects the way drivers want to work."

That legislative proposal is bill H.1234 (not a typo). Currently in the state's Senate, the bill seeks to legally classify gig workers as independent contractors while simultaneously offering them a portable benefits account. The account would provide at least three choices for retirement accounts, as well as benefits such as income replacement and health insurance.

The legislation would require gig economy companies to contribute 4% of an eligible driver's earnings to a portable benefits account. Workers must earn at least $2,550 per quarter from app-based companies to be eligible for the proposed benefits.

"What the pandemic showed us very clearly is that work as we knew it has changed forever," Rep. Carlos González, a co-author of the bill, told Protocol. "You have a contractor relationship or an employee relationship, but there has to be something in between and that's the nature of what we're trying to get across with this bill."

But the coalition of labor groups and gig workers are working to ensure this bill doesn't become law. Beth Griffith, a gig worker, chair of the Boston Independent Drivers Guild and member of the Coalition for Workers' Rights, said it's important that this legislation doesn't pass.

"It would create a permanent underclass of drivers," she told Protocol.

As part of Prop. 22, companies provided health care stipends to eligible workers, wage minimums, accidental death insurance and more, but gig workers in California have said companies aren't delivering on what they promised. While Prop. 22 has not appeased everyone, Firestone said even the imperfect Prop. 22 is better than what's on the table in Massachusetts.

The bill "is like an even worse Prop. 22," Firestone said.

But the Coalition to Protect Workers' Rights isn't too concerned that H. 1234 will become law. Firestone noted how the bill only has a couple of sponsors and hasn't "attracted much enthusiasm from legislators in Massachusetts, in part because it's such a bad idea," he said.

The Massachusetts Coalition for Independent Work, however, sees H.1234 as a "good starting point for discussions," Yunits said.

"We feel very confident in the legislature's ability to deal with this issue here in Massachusetts and come up with the best outcome," he said.

An Uber spokesperson echoed the sentiment.

"We are confident that, unlike California, Massachusetts leaders will work together to ensure that drivers are able to gain new protections and benefits while keeping the flexibility they overwhelmingly want," the Uber spokesperson said.

In the event the state legislature does pass H. 1234, Yunits said the coalition is paying attention to the August 4 deadline to submit a ballot initiative.

"We're looking at the preliminary steps to get involved," he said.

That would not come as a surprise to Griffith and other labor activists, given what happened in California.

"They've realized they can just purchase laws," she said.

Firestone agreed. He said there is a 100% chance that companies will do this.

But if the coalition of gig-economy companies does file a ballot measure, Firestone and his coalition will be ready.

"We have organized to defend against a $100 million-plus effort by these companies to undermine workers' rights and civil rights on the ballot," he said, "Which we fully anticipate."

Power

Google wants to (try to) make Google Glass cool again

Also this week: savvy virtual assistants, surveillance without violating people's privacy, and more patents from Big Tech.

Is making these cool even possible?

Image: Google

This week was so full of fun patent applications that I didn't know where to start. We've got a throwback to 2013, a virtual assistant that knows when I've stopped talking, and headphones that can determine a user's hearing abilities.

But as always, remember that the big tech companies file all kinds of crazy patents for things, and though most never amount to anything, some end up defining the future

Keep Reading Show less
Karyne Levy

Karyne Levy ( @karynelevy) is the West Coast editor at Protocol. Before joining Protocol, Karyne was a senior producer at Scribd, helping to create the original content program. Prior to that she was an assigning editor at NerdWallet, a senior tech editor at Business Insider, and the assistant managing editor at CNET, where she also hosted Rumor Has It for CNET TV. She lives outside San Francisco with her wife, son and lots of pets.

As President of Alibaba Group, I am often asked, "What is Alibaba doing in the U.S.?"

In fact, most people are not aware we have a business in the U.S. because we are not a U.S. consumer-facing service that people use every day – nor do we want to be. Our consumers – nearly 900 million of them – are located in China.

Keep Reading Show less
J. Michael Evans
Michael Evans leads and executes Alibaba Group's international strategy for globalizing the company and expanding its businesses outside of China.

Does Elon Musk make Tesla tech?

Between the massive valuation and the self-driving software, Tesla isn't hard to sell as a tech company. But does that mean that, in 10 years, every car will be tech?

You know what's not tech and is a car company? Volkswagen.

Image: Tesla/Protocol

From disagreements about what "Autopilot" should mean and SolarCity lawsuits to space colonization and Boring Company tunnels, extremely online Tesla CEO Elon Musk and his company stay firmly in the news, giving us all plenty of opportunities to consider whether the company that made electric cars cool counts as tech.

The massive valuation definitely screams tech, as does the company's investment in self-driving software and battery development. But at the end of the day, this might not be enough to convince skeptics that Tesla is anything other than a car company that uses tech. It also raises questions about the role that timeliness plays in calling something tech. In a potential future where EVs are the norm and many run on Tesla's own software — which is well within the realm of possibility — will Tesla lose its claim to a tech pedigree?

Keep Reading Show less
Becca Evans
Becca Evans is a copy editor and producer at Protocol. Previously she edited Carrie Ann Conversations, a wellness and lifestyle publication founded by Carrie Ann Inaba. She's also written for STYLECASTER. Becca lives in Los Angeles.
Protocol | Workplace

Apple isn’t the only tech company spooked by the delta variant

Spooked by rising cases of COVID-19, many tech companies delay their office reopening.

Apple and at least two other Silicon Valley companies have decided to delay their reopenings in response to rising COVID-19 case counts.

Photo: Luis Alvarez via Getty

Apple grabbed headlines this week when it told employees it would delay its office reopening until October or later. But the iPhone maker wasn't alone: At least two other Silicon Valley companies decided to delay their reopenings last week in response to rising COVID-19 case counts.

Both ServiceNow and Pure Storage opted to push back their September return-to-office dates last week, telling employees they can work remotely until at least the end of the year. Other companies may decide to exercise more caution given the current trends.

Keep Reading Show less
Allison Levitsky
Allison Levitsky is a reporter at Protocol covering workplace issues in tech. She previously covered big tech companies and the tech workforce for the Silicon Valley Business Journal. Allison grew up in the Bay Area and graduated from UC Berkeley.
Protocol | Workplace

Half of working parents have felt discriminated against during COVID

A new survey found that working parents at the VP level are more likely to say they've faced discrimination at work than their lower-level counterparts.

A new survey looks at discrimination faced by working parents during the pandemic.

Photo: d3sign/Getty Images

The toll COVID-19 has taken on working parents — particularly working moms — is, by now, well-documented. The impact for parents in low-wage jobs has been particularly devastating.

But a new survey, shared exclusively with Protocol, finds that among parents who kept their jobs through the pandemic, people who hold more senior positions are actually more likely to say they faced discrimination at work than their lower-level colleagues.

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.

Latest Stories