California’s high court has upheld a voter-approved initiative that allows certain gig workers to remain independent contractors rather than become traditional employees, concluding that the measure does not conflict with a provision of the California Constitution.
On July 25, the state Supreme Court handed down the decision on Proposition 22, which protects the ability of app-based rideshare and delivery drivers to continue to be classified as independent contractors. The opinion caps a four-year legal battle during which some gig workers who drive for Uber and Lyft, as well as the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), sought additional benefits for the workers than the initiative provided, such as workers’ compensation and “meaningful health care coverage.”
The Protect App-Based Drivers and Services Coalition, which endorsed Proposition 22, welcomed the high court’s decision, arguing that most gig workers like the freedoms associated with being independent contractors, as well as the guaranteed earnings and health care stipend that Lyft, Uber and DoorDash agreed to provide under the initiative’s terms.
“The California Supreme Court ruling is an overwhelming victory for voters’ rights and the integrity of our state’s initiative system,” Protect App-Based Drivers and Services (PADS) spokeswoman Molly Weedn said in a prepared statement. “This ruling is not just a win for the nearly 1.4 million drivers who rely on the flexibility of app-based work to make ends meet, but for millions of consumers and thousands of businesses who rely on app-based services across the state. The courts have spoken, and this issue can finally be put to rest.”
Plaintiffs in the case before the high court, Castellanos v. State of California, argued that a section of Proposition 22 conflicts with Article 14 of the state Constitution, which gives the state Legislature “plenary power, unlimited by any provision of this Constitution, to create, and enforce a complete system of workers’ compensation, by appropriate legislation.”
The court, however, disagreed, indicating that the Constitution does not give the Legislature “the sole authority, to the exclusion of the initiative power, to govern workers’ compensation.”
Though SEIU officials expressed disappointment with the court decision, an SEIU spokeswoman told the Southern California Record in an email that the union would continue to support gig workers’ efforts to unionize not just in California but across the nation.
“Union rights for Massachusetts rideshare drivers are on the ballot this November,” Isabel Urbano, an SEIU spokeswoman, said. “The first-of-its-kind ballot initiative is poised to win collective bargaining and unionization rights for nearly 70,000 Uber and Lyft drivers across the Bay State. Two-thirds of Massachusetts voters support Uber and Lyft drivers having the right to form a union and collectively bargain for better wages and working conditions, according to a poll of likely 2024 voters across the state.”
SEIU President April Verrett also vowed to bring companies such as Uber and Lyft to the bargaining table.
“Deep-pocketed corporations may be able to outspend us, but nobody can out-organize SEIU’s 2 million members,” Verrett said in a prepared statement. “We are committed to fiercely backing workers across our economy who have been written out and left behind and helping them knock down big obstacles to winning their union rights.”
AB5, the law that prompted the Prop 22 referendum in the first place, was drafted and championed by former State Rep. Lorena Gonzalez, a San Diego Democrat who has since left the state legislature to serve as president of the powerful California AFL-CIO labor union. In passing the law, Gonzalez and other Democrats made no secret of their desire to use the law to force companies like Uber and Lyft to unionize or risk going out of business.
The PADS Coalition has emphasized that 60% of California voters supported Proposition 22, as did 120,000 drivers and numerous senior, business and social justice groups.