Dozens of taxi drivers and delivery workers gathered on the steps of the California Supreme Court ahead of oral arguments to potentially overturn Proposition 22, which could impact more than a million gig workers in the state.
“Justice for the workers,” one of the speakers shouted.
The chant was met with cheers from the crowd, including ride driver Joe Augusto.
“I drive with both platforms, Uber and Lyft, and they are twins. They behave the same. Their price is the same,” he said.
Augusto started driving full-time in 2015 and said his income has dropped dramatically in recent years, especially after Prop 22 passed.
“What the proposal did is give them a safe haven where they can basically do whatever they want. They have cut driver pay by 20-30%. At the same time, passengers pay significantly more; That’s what I tell me,” Augusto said.
He said that as a true independent contractor, drivers would be able to set their own rates, rather than the company setting rates for them.
Prop 22 was approved by voters in November 2020 and app-based drivers were reclassified as independent contractors instead of employees, who would be legally entitled to benefits.
The oral arguments focused on whether voters have the same power as legislators to regulate employment conditions.
DoorDash said in a statement that Prop 22 was something voters and gig workers wanted.
“California voters and Dashers made it overwhelmingly clear that they support Prop 22 when they passed the law with nearly 60 percent of the vote. Today’s hearing reminded us that this law, enacted by the people, should have a lasting future. percent of Dashers and other app-based workers say Prop 22 should remain the law, and we hope the Court agrees,” DoorDash said.
Lyft also released a statement to KPIX.
‘Prop. 22 protects the independence drivers value and gives them benefits such as an income guarantee, access to healthcare benefits and more. The Court of Appeals decision to uphold Prop. 22 was the right thing to do, and in line with the long term. An existing legal precedent that maintains the initiative power of the voters. As Prop. 22, drivers could lose access to flexible earning options and millions of Californians could face difficulty finding affordable transportation,” Lyft said.
UC Berkeley’s Labor Center just released a new study on Monday that looks at the average income of gig drivers in five major U.S. cities, including San Francisco. This showed that on average drivers are paid less than the minimum wage, after deducting expenses.
The study found that rideshare drivers earned an average of $5.97 per hour before tips, while food delivery workers earned even less ($4.98 per hour before tips).
DoorDash delivery driver David Lewis said he can work as an independent contractor whenever he wants, instead of being forced into a specific schedule like he could if he were an employee of the company.
“It gives me the flexibility to be able to put in a few extra hours,” said Lewis.
Lewis said his main job right now is working as a taxi driver, but he makes about $2,000 a month working at DoorDash during the times when his pedal cab is slow.
“I don’t look at DoorDash as a full-time job. I look at it as something that complements me to make ends meet,” Lewis said.
In a statement, Uber said rolling back Prop 22 would cost Dashers like Lewis that flexibility.
“Forced employment would be devastating for the thousands of drivers and couriers who turn to Uber for flexible work, and for the millions of Californians who would see major cuts and cost increases – or lose ride-sharing and food delivery altogether. We are confident that the Supreme Court will listen to the will of California voters and uphold Prop 22,” Uber said.
For full-time gig workers like John, he hopes the court will find Prop 22 unconstitutional so he can get the same protections as other workers.
“Everyone has labor standards and rights, and we’re being singled out where we basically have no labor rights. And we don’t have rights for independent contractors like other people.”
Although oral arguments took place before the California Supreme Court on Tuesday, a ruling is not expected immediately. The court has 90 days to make a final ruling.
Katie Nielsen
