[ad_1]
A Massachusetts court said Tuesday that proposed ballot paper violated state laws regarding the job status of concert drivers and was ineligible to be presented to voters this fall.
The measure, supported by companies like Uber and Lyft, would classify gig drivers as independent contractors rather than employees, a long-term goal of companies. The decision effectively ended a $17.8 million campaign by concert companies to support the initiative.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court wrote in its ruling that the voting measure contained two “significantly different policy decisions”, “one of which was embedded in ambiguous language”, that violated the state’s constitution and required all parts of a ballot to be associated.
The court challenged the injunction that the drivers in question were not “employees or agents” of a concert company, as it appeared to be an attempt to shield Uber and Lyft from liability in the event of an accident or crime. According to the panel of seven judges, this provision was independent of the rest of the proposal, which concerned the benefits drivers would or would not receive as independent contractors.
“The petitions that embed separate policy decisions in vague language raise concerns that voters will be confused, misled, and deprived of a meaningful election,” the court said.
The concert companies’ campaign to lock down the working status of their drivers in Massachusetts was similar to an effort in California two years ago. It would have provided some limited benefits to drivers, but freed companies from the need to pay them for full health care, leave, or other employee benefits.
Concert companies convinced California voters to pass Proposition 22, a ballot measure that locked in drivers’ independent contractor status; it was later overturned by a judge.
Opponents of the Massachusetts vote measure welcomed the court’s decision.
“Millions of Massachusetts drivers, passengers and taxpayers can take comfort in knowing that this unconstitutional proposal by Big Tech CEOs to manipulate Massachusetts law was rejected by the Supreme Court,” said Wes McEnany, leader of Massachusetts Not For Sale. email. “The ballot was written as an attempt to not only reduce the rights of drivers, but would also put the rights of passengers and the public at risk.”
Uber and Lyft declined to comment, but the organization that took the action expressed disappointment and argued it would have broad support by the fall.
“A clear majority of Massachusetts voters, transit and delivery drivers, would both support and legislate this voting issue,” Conor Yunits, who leads the Massachusetts Independent Work Coalition, said in a statement.
The group hoped the state legislature would still take action on drivers’ job status before the end of the summer. “We hope the legislature will stand by the 80 percent of drivers who want flexibility and want to remain independent contractors while accessing new benefits,” said Mr. Yunits.
This is a developing story. It will be updated.
[ad_2]
Source link