Bribed by unions, corrupt Democrat-run California banned "gig workers." Citizens fought back

Most adults recognize that certain human traits are obvious.  Like "People love free shit, and will support pols who offer 'em free stuff."  "People like money and power."  "Politicians are particularly power-hungry."  "Many people would rather sit on their ass than work." 

Anyone care to argue with any of that?

Now, take labor unions.  They bleat that they "protect working people."  Got it.  It's merely a coincidence that unions make the executives of those unions extremely rich.  And the more union members, the more money goes to the execs from union dues.  Any arguments?

So obviously union execs want to get as many workers as possible to join.  And young Americans should know that a few decades ago union execs had gotten Dem lawmakers in over half of all states to pass LAWS forcing workers to join a union to get a job.  Seriously.  (After decades, 27 states have finally passed "right to work" laws ending forced union membership.)

With that as background: As most Americans know, Uber and Lyft provide lower-cost rides than taxi companies.  They're able to do this because their drivers work whenever they want, so  are classified as "independent contractors" instead of employees.  By contrast, drivers of taxi companies are classified as employees, so are forced by state and federal governments to provide a huge array of benefits to drivers.  And they're unionized.

So again, the key to the lower prices offered by Uber and Lyft (and literally hundreds of other companies in other fields) is that drivers have been "independent contractors," working only when it was convenient for 'em, using their own cars and only accepting fares they wanted to accept--a situation radically different from employees of taxi companies.

Remember that term "independent contractors" cuz it's critical to the controversy I'm about to explain.

Not surprisingly, union execs and people who owned taxi companies hated Uber and Lyft because it hurt their income, and they looked for ways to either force these competitors out of business or force them to treat drivers as employees, eliminating their cost advantage.

Since the unionized taxi companies couldn't match Uber and Lyft's lower prices, the only way to do this was to get state governments to pass LAWS forcing drivers for those companies to be classified as employees--not only eliminating their cost advantage but also...wait for it...forcing them by federal law to accept unionization.

Starting to see the cunning yet?  Nah, you're not quite there.

Unions (and companies, for that matter) have long known that the easiest way to make money is to bribe lawmakers, so they went to legislators in the Democrat-ruled shithole of California asking 'em to pass a law forcing Uber and Lyft to classify their drivers as employees--eliminating their cost advantage.

But consultants and "advisors" told the unions that if a law singled out Uber and Lyft, the bribe would be too obvious to voters. So the "consultants" urged that the proposed law be broadened to include ALL "independent contractors"--shortened to "gig workers."

[Some young Americans may not know that "gig" comes from amateur musicians picking up jobs for a few bucks.]  

One small problem fo' duh corrupt legislators: lawyers working at law firms, and realtors, have always been treated as independent contractors, and quickly realized that being classified as employees would hurt their income.

No problem:  Both groups had LOTS of money, so after few hundred-thousand dollars in "donations,"  legislators quickly amended the bill to specifically exclude those two powerful groups from the new law. 

Uber and Lyft decided they probably wouldn't be able to out-bribe the unions and taxi companies to get lawmakers to carve out the special exception won by lawyers and realtors, so they announced they'd have to stop doing business in California.  The union bosses laughed "Mission accomplished."

So in 2019 the Dems who utterly control the Cali legislature passed the "no more gig workers" law--"AB-5"--on a straight party-line vote.  Democrat governor Gavin Newsom signed it into law on September 18, 2019. The new law ordered that if  musicians got more than four gigs a year from the same bar, they'd be considered employees.  

Same for "freelance" court reporters and writers:  If freelance writers sold more than four articles a year for the same paper or magazine, they'd be classed as "employees"--meaning the outfit that bought the stories would now offer "union bargaining rights," pay "time-and-a-half" for overtime, offer paid sick leave, employer-paid health care and unemployment insurance.  

How many businesses would buy more than four articles a year under those conditions, eh?

See how well totalitarian government works, kids?  No, you don't, but you're getting closer.

Then something happened that the corrupt Democrats running the state didn't anticipate: Voters began to wake up, and realized they'd have to pay a lot more for the rides that LOTS of people in big Cali cities depend on.  

Dem legislators just laughed.  'We have spoken, and you can't do jack about it.'

Now: California--like most states--has a thing called a "ballot initiative."  Note that term.  It's a holdover from a time when Americans believed voters shouldn't be forced to let corrupt, bribed lawmakers control all laws, but instead voters should be allowed to propose laws, which would then be put to a vote of the people.  

Really radical stuff, eh citizen?  And naturally, corrupt lawmakers hate that provision.

So now voters did something the corrupt Dem lawmakers didn't anticipate:  Fans of freedom began collecting signatures to put an "initiative" on the ballot called "Proposition 22," which would classify drivers for "app-based transportation and delivery companies" as "independent contractors"--as they were before the corrupt AB-5 passed.

They got enough signatures to put it on the ballot, and in November of 2020 it passed, 59-41.

But the Deep State has an infinite number of ways of blocking any law it doesn't want, as it did with the ballot measure passed by Cali voters declaring marriage as being solely between a man and a woman--which passed by a huge margin but was quickly struck down by the chief justice of the state supreme court, who quickly retired and admitted he'd been queer for decades.

In the case of Prop 22 the unions knew they'd make millions if they could get a court to overturn that measure, so just days (literally) after Prop 22 took effect, they sued to have it declared unconstitutional.  The reason was really arcane (i.e. bullshit):  They claimed Prop 22 "interfered with lawmakers' authority over workers' compensation.")

The case went to the state supreme court.  And amazingly, yesterday the court unanimously voted that Prop 22 was constitutional, rejecting the unions' challenge.

The big issue here is, should the government be able to ORDER that people who want to work on their own schedules, not dictated by an employer, be treated as employees?  Obviously no one forces "gig workers" to work as independent contractors, but the flexibility works very well for some people.

The unions and government said "We don't care.  We know best, and we won't allow that."

Here's the LA Times carrying the torch for the unions and Dem fans of all-powerful government:

Some drivers [for Uber and Lyft] have raised concerns over low wages, minimal workplace protections and exploitative practices they say they face.

Ahhh, "exploitative," eh?  To make the lies obvious: No one forces anyone to work as a driver for ride-share companies.  People do because it gives them the flexibility to work at their convenience.  But it's easy to understand why unions would form groups of gig workers to demand the benefits of being considered employees: free shit, eh?  Well, free except for the inevitable union dues.

Of course the alleged "workers' organizations" are set up and funded by the unions.  

So...with the decision from the state's highest court, is Prop 22 now settled law?

Hahahahaha!  I see you just arrived on the planet.  Enjoy your stay. 

The Times says "Labor groups said there may be other avenues for gig workers to win workplace protections."

The communist director of the "Service Employees International Union California" noted that an earlier ruling in the appeals process recognized that the state legislature could pass laws allowing ride-share drivers to join a union, which would allow them to strike for higher pay, full benefits and unspecified "protections."

The president of the California Federation of Labor Unions said her group "will continue to fight to stop wealthy corporations from abusing the initiative process to deny workers’ rights.”

Here's a news flash, bitch: "If people don't like the terms, no one is forcing anyone to work there, eh?"  It's called "freedom," and both unions and fans of all-powerful government can't stand that concept.  Oh they bleat that they love freedom, it's just that they don't like what it entails.

Oh, and what of freelance court reporters, writers and local musicians?  They're fucked, because instead of taking on the Orwellian overreach of AB-5 head-on, the organizers of Prop-22 chickened out, wording Prop 22 so it only exempted ride-share and delivery services instead of to all gig workers.

And since freelancers, unlike Uber and Lyft, don't have tens of millions to spend fighting AB-5, that totalitarian law will continue to apply to freelancers.  So ironically, a law meant to eliminate low-cost competition to taxi companies ends up not hurting them, but hurting people trying to make a little extra income, like performing in bands or writing occasional articles.

Law of Unintended Consequences strikes again, thanks to Dem government corruption.

Source: LA Times

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/california-supreme-court-upholds-prop-175415804.html