People

Coronavirus slowed Uber and Lyft — but not their big-money efforts to undo AB 5

The gig economy companies added $267,000 to a California campaign that seeks to rewrite the rules for contract workers.

Driveshare workers hold signs supporting AB5

Uber and Lyft drivers protested in Los Angeles in early February, saying they worked long hours without employee benefits.

Photo: Ronen Tivony/Echoes Wire/Barcroft Media via Getty Images

As the San Francisco Bay Area locked down, Silicon Valley's political machine kept churning. On March 17 — the day authorities ordered millions of people to shelter in place to limit the spread of coronavirus — Uber chipped in $21,960 to a $110.6 million war chest it has amassed with fellow gig-economy heavyweights Lyft, Instacart, DoorDash and Postmates, state records show.

Their goal: to convince California voters to support a November ballot initiative that would reverse a new state law, Assembly Bill 5, that sought to require legions of contract drivers and shoppers to be paid and treated as full-time employees.

The contribution, though modest, was one of 10 that Uber and Lyft made since the first California cases of COVID-19 appeared in late January, totaling more than $267,000, records show. The payments are an indicator that one of the defining policy fights of the tech industry — which could determine the viability of an entire sector and the fate of millions of workers — is likely to get wrapped up in a swirl of money and politics, as voters deal with the fallout of the pandemic and choose a new president.

Everyone agrees that the turn to social distancing has fundamentally changed the battle over gig work, now that on-demand delivery has emerged as an essential service in a global crisis. What Uber, Lyft and their allies are betting is that, with their war chest, they can win with a message that their business model built on low labor costs has been vindicated — and that they can parlay a victory into gains in other states.

But lawmakers and a new wave of gig worker advocacy groups that have supported AB 5 say the lesson of the lockdowns is just the opposite, that vital workers need to be treated as such. With a louder voice and increasing leverage, they say gig companies should focus on worker safety, comply with the new law and give up the ballot measure — and perhaps even liquidate the campaign fund to give workers raises.

"COVID-19 has made it very clear that this is a tenuous situation," said Rey Fuentes, an attorney with the Oakland office of Partnership for Working Families, a labor advocacy group. "It really puts in stark relief the companies' continued reliance on a business model that is now contrary to law in many states."

Gig companies contend that the economic rationale behind their campaign to keep workers classified as contractors is clearer than ever. Some need additional bodies all over the country — up to 300,000, in the case of Instacart — and laid-off workers can turn to their platforms for fast cash.

"We've seen the stuff that labor's been putting out, and we just fundamentally disagree on every front," said Stacey Wells, campaign spokesperson for the coalition supporting the ballot measure. "Employment is not going to work for the vast majority of people who drive delivery and ride-share."

Whether gig workers win full or partial benefits like paid sick leave, health care and overtime pay rests not only with the ballot measure but a web of court cases, administrative wage claims, and challenges from local officials. In the meantime, as competing petitions and social media campaigns spread from the rival camps, workers must rely on emergency provisions like hand sanitizer and limited paid leave if they can produce a positive COVID-19 test.

"AB 5 was obviously a watershed moment, but that struggle's not over," said San Francisco Supervisor Gordon Mar, a former labor organizer who recently authored a resolution calling on city and state attorneys to bring an injunction to force gig economy companies to hire contractors as employees. "In the current health crisis, it's even more urgent."

Following the money

In all, Uber and Lyft gave $267,283 from late January through mid-March to support the "Protect App-Based Drivers and Services Act," according to filings with the California Secretary of State. Lyft made the biggest contribution in that period with a $70,000 payment on March 1, just as Gov. Gavin Newsom started warning of looming shortages of protective equipment like masks.

The campaign kicked off last fall, before AB 5 was officially signed into law, when Uber, DoorDash and Lyft each loaned $30 million to the campaign. Instacart and Postmates contributed another $10 million apiece.

The campaign has also had a busy start to 2020 on the ground. In late March, while the rest of California was sheltered in place, the gig company coalition submitted 1 million signatures to election officials who are now evaluating whether they achieved the required 623,212 valid signatures. The signatures were gathered in January and February by 1,000 volunteer ride-hailing drivers as well as paid petitioners, Wells said. Despite the unexpected uncertainty with the virus, she said the campaign is continuing as planned.

"Most of the public doesn't really start paying attention until Labor Day, so we're still doing what we would be doing," Wells said. "There's still a lot happening."

Uber and Lyft did not answer specific questions from Protocol about their support of the ballot measure, or whether they plan to continue campaign contributions amid reports of mounting financial pressure. Last week, The Information reported that Uber's passenger revenue was poised to plummet due to the lockdowns to about half the monthly $800 million the company generated this time last year. Uber reported $10.9 billion in cash on hand last year; Lyft said it had $358 million.

The California ballot measure is part of a broader political strategy for the companies. Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi successfully lobbied President Trump and federal lawmakers to include contract workers like Uber's 1.3 million drivers in a taxpayer-funded stimulus bill promising increased unemployment benefits. There should be a "third way" for gig workers to access some protections, Khosrowshahi argued, as opposed to strict employee classification requirements.

"It would radically change Uber's core service and business model," Khosrowshahi wrote to Trump, "and would ultimately lead to restrictions on access to income for millions of people looking for this type of work."

Any drastic change to Uber or Lyft's cost structures would affect consumers who have gotten used to cheap rides. Though comprehensive data on gig economy pay and employment is hard to come by, industry estimates peg the cost of contractors at 20% to 30% less than employees.

For people like Carlos Ramos, a 38-year-old military veteran and Lyft driver in Bakersfield who previously advocated for AB 5 with Gig Workers Rising, the promised financial relief has yet to materialize. In mid-March, he stopped commuting to the Bay Area, where he often stayed with family for days at a time so he could pick up higher fares near San Francisco. He felt fine but worried about what he might bring home to family members who live nearby.

"I really started to think about the fact that people over 60 are dying," Ramos said. "My mother just turned 60 two weeks ago."

Ramos said he drives a Mercedes C300 sedan because it makes him eligible for the company's better-paid Lyft Lux rides. But without fares coming in, he said, the car is just one of many financial stresses as he waits for either a government stimulus check or the unemployment benefits he applied for.

"We're in this holding pattern," Ramos said. "That's been very indicative of this whole thing. You see it on the horizon, but you don't have anything at your front door."

The gig game plan

Gig economy companies are far from the first to try to shift the burden for costly employee benefits to their workers or taxpayers. Service sector employers like Walmart and McDonald's have been criticized for paying hourly workers minimum wage while they rely on food stamps, government health plans and other safety net programs.

But the pressure on gig work employers has magnified in recent weeks as labor groups organized strikes against companies including Instacart and Amazon. The groups, most with varied ties to more established labor unions, include Gig Workers Rising, Rideshare Drivers United and We Drive Progress.

The latter group, which directs inquiries to an email address for the Service Employees International Union, listed demands on its website and asked visitors to send them via an online form directly to executives at companies like Uber. In addition to liquidating the ballot measure fund, We Drive Progress called on Uber and Lyft to comply with AB 5, begin paying into California's state unemployment fund, and guarantee paid sick leave for drivers with any symptoms of COVID-19 at a minimum $15 per hour and 30 hours per week.

"At this stage it's really challenging, because the gears of the legal system move far slower than our imagination," said Fuentes of Partnership for Working Families. "This is absolutely a long-term fight."

Labor advocates have won court battles, including a San Diego injunction against Instacart, though that ruling was not enforced during ongoing appeals. In recent months, individual drivers have also begun filing wage claims with local labor boards, and city attorneys, the state attorney general or investigative agencies like those within the state Department of Industrial Relations may bring additional enforcement actions.

But the ballot measure could be a game-changer for the companies. The measure — which would have companies issue stipends for health care and provide some access to worker's compensation, but bar workers from unionizing or being classified as employees — could not be amended in the future without a seven-eigths supermajority of the state legislature.

"That's why they're spending $110 million," Fuentes said. "It's solving the problem."


Get in touch with us: Share information securely with Protocol via encrypted Signal or WhatsApp message, at 415-214-4715 or through our anonymous SecureDrop.


Wells, the campaign spokesperson, said the high bar to amend the bill was added to prevent the state's Democratic majority from undoing "the will of the voters on a whim." For now, she said, the deep-pocketed campaign continues to operate over Zoom calls, and she isn't worried about future fundraising prospects.

"We're comfortable where we are right now," Wells said. "The whole world is in a different place than where it was 30 days ago."

Fintech

Gavin Newsom shows crypto some California love

“A more flexible approach is needed,” Gov. Newsom said in rejecting a bill that would require crypto companies to get a state license.

Strong bipartisan support wasn’t enough to convince Newsom that requiring crypto companies to register with the state’s Department of Financial Protection and Innovation is the smart path for California.

Photo: Jerod Harris/Getty Images for Vox Media

The Digital Financial Assets Law seemed like a legislative slam dunk in California for critics of the crypto industry.

But strong bipartisan support — it passed 71-0 in the state assembly and 31-6 in the Senate — wasn’t enough to convince Gov. Gavin Newsom that requiring crypto companies to register with the state’s Department of Financial Protection and Innovation is the smart path for California.

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at bpimentel@protocol.com or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.

Sponsored Content

Great products are built on strong patents

Experts say robust intellectual property protection is essential to ensure the long-term R&D required to innovate and maintain America's technology leadership.

Every great tech product that you rely on each day, from the smartphone in your pocket to your music streaming service and navigational system in the car, shares one important thing: part of its innovative design is protected by intellectual property (IP) laws.

From 5G to artificial intelligence, IP protection offers a powerful incentive for researchers to create ground-breaking products, and governmental leaders say its protection is an essential part of maintaining US technology leadership. To quote Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo: "intellectual property protection is vital for American innovation and entrepreneurship.”

Keep Reading Show less
James Daly
James Daly has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, including understanding various audiences and targeting messaging accordingly. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, particularly in launching new ventures and building passionate audiences. Daly has led teams large and small to multiple awards and quantifiable success through a strategy built on teamwork, passion, fact-checking, intelligence, analytics, and audience growth while meeting budget goals and production deadlines in fast-paced environments. Daly is the Editorial Director of 2030 Media and a contributor at Wired.
Workplace

Slack’s rallying cry at Dreamforce: No more meetings

It’s not all cartoon bears and therapy pigs — work conferences are a good place to talk about the future of work.

“We want people to be able to work in whatever way works for them with flexible schedules, in meetings and out of meetings,” Slack chief product officer Tamar Yehoshua told Protocol at Dreamforce 2022.

Photo: Marlena Sloss/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Dreamforce is primarily Salesforce’s show. But Slack wasn’t to be left out, especially as the primary connector between Salesforce and the mainstream working world.

The average knowledge worker spends more time using a communication tool like Slack than a CRM like Salesforce, positioning it as the best Salesforce product to concern itself with the future of work. In between meeting a therapy pig and meditating by the Dreamforce waterfall, Protocol sat down with several Slack execs and conference-goers to chat about the shifting future.

Keep Reading Show less
Lizzy Lawrence

Lizzy Lawrence ( @LizzyLaw_) is a reporter at Protocol, covering tools and productivity in the workplace. She's a recent graduate of the University of Michigan, where she studied sociology and international studies. She served as editor in chief of The Michigan Daily, her school's independent newspaper. She's based in D.C., and can be reached at llawrence@protocol.com.

LA is a growing tech hub. But not everyone may fit.

LA has a housing crisis similar to Silicon Valley’s. And single-family-zoning laws are mostly to blame.

As the number of tech companies in the region grows, so does the number of tech workers, whose high salaries put them at an advantage in both LA's renting and buying markets.

Photo: Nat Rubio-Licht/Protocol

LA’s tech scene is on the rise. The number of unicorn companies in Los Angeles is growing, and the city has become the third-largest startup ecosystem nationally behind the Bay Area and New York with more than 4,000 VC-backed startups in industries ranging from aerospace to creators. As the number of tech companies in the region grows, so does the number of tech workers. The city is quickly becoming more and more like Silicon Valley — a new startup and a dozen tech workers on every corner and companies like Google, Netflix, and Twitter setting up offices there.

But with growth comes growing pains. Los Angeles, especially the burgeoning Silicon Beach area — which includes Santa Monica, Venice, and Marina del Rey — shares something in common with its namesake Silicon Valley: a severe lack of housing.

Keep Reading Show less
Nat Rubio-Licht

Nat Rubio-Licht is a Los Angeles-based news writer at Protocol. They graduated from Syracuse University with a degree in newspaper and online journalism in May 2020. Prior to joining the team, they worked at the Los Angeles Business Journal as a technology and aerospace reporter.

Policy

SFPD can now surveil a private camera network funded by Ripple chair

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors approved a policy that the ACLU and EFF argue will further criminalize marginalized groups.

SFPD will be able to temporarily tap into private surveillance networks in certain circumstances.

Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Ripple chairman and co-founder Chris Larsen has been funding a network of security cameras throughout San Francisco for a decade. Now, the city has given its police department the green light to monitor the feeds from those cameras — and any other private surveillance devices in the city — in real time, whether or not a crime has been committed.

This week, San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors approved a controversial plan to allow SFPD to temporarily tap into private surveillance networks during life-threatening emergencies, large events, and in the course of criminal investigations, including investigations of misdemeanors. The decision came despite fervent opposition from groups, including the ACLU of Northern California and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which say the police department’s new authority will be misused against protesters and marginalized groups in a city that has been a bastion for both.

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
Bulletins