The municipality's public security and neighborhood services came in to discuss a resolution that will support a proposed California state bill that requires Uber and Lyft to make their drivers' employees. Currently, drivers are classified as independent contractors, sometimes referred to as gig workers, meaning they do not receive benefits, including social security, health insurance, sick leave, and overtime.
More than two dozen drivers took to the podium with similar stories. They said that they have seen lower wages, higher costs and longer working hours as the cost of living has risen over the years. When they get sick, they said they can't afford to take care of.
"Since Lyft's incentives have traditionally been linked to the number of trips, instead of the time on the road, I am encouraged to push myself to the border," said Edan Alva, a lifter driver in San Francisco. me trapped as one should be hamsters running in a wheel. "
The question of gigantic worker classification is nothing new. Litigation has been broughtback to 2013. Since then, several cities and states have considered the case. While New York City for drivers in December of December, the National Labor Relations Board said last month that it believes drivers should be classified as contractors instead of employees. During California's proposed Assembly Bill 5, drivers would be classified as employees, provided benefits and have the right to collective organization.
Uber and Lyft appear to be against AB 5. One reason why companies must rework their business models if they are required to turn the drivers into employees. Not only do they have to pay labor costs, they also have to manage a workforce of tens of thousands of drivers in California.
In a rare collaborative partner, Uber and Lyft band together over edition. The CEOs of both companies wrote a joint op-ed in the San Francisco Chronicle earlier this month and said they wanted to work with the state to allow drivers to remain independent contractors. In return, the companies said they would give the drivers a "driver's payment commitment" and let them form a "new driver's association."
"It is also no secret that a change in the employment classification of the driving shares would pose a risk to our businesses," wrote the CEOs.
The two companies also sent messages to all California drivers who say that if they are classified as employees, they may lose their flexible work schedules. The messages encouraged drivers to contact state legislators to say what they value about their work. A Lyft spokesman said more than 30,000 emails on the subject had been sent to lawmakers since it sent out the message.
"Lifting speaks for an approach in line with the interests of our driver's community," the spokesman said in an email. "Our goal is to preserve the driver's independence and flexibility."
A spokesman from Uber said the company did not take a position on AB 5.
"We do not seek a carving, but we are searching for new legislation that will give the protection and obligations they ask for if, while providing protection for our business model, the Uber spokesman said.
Almost all the drivers who spoke in the committee's hearing on Friday said they wanted California to pass AB 5 and they wanted San Francisco to support the bill. Many cited one may study by the Economic Policy Institute that says the average salary for a US ri-hail driver is $ 9.21 per hour after deduction of expenses, such as gas and maintenance.
"The only benefit I get with Uber and Lyft are diabetes, high blood pressure and high cholesterol, "says Al Aloudi, who has been running for the two companies since 2015." Uber and Lyft give us messages saying that AB 5 is about flexibility. AB 5 is not about flexibility, it's about our rights. "
After hearing from the drivers, the four supervisors in the committee had to hear everyone agree to protect the gig workers. Supervisor Rafael Mandelman, who is the head of the committee, was choked and said how difficult it was to hear their stories.
"I thought of the arrogance of people a decade ago as promised disturbance, and the boy they have delivered," Mandelman said. "Rely heavily on a business model that disassembles more than half a century of advances in employee protection."
He and the other supervisors promised to get the entire board to pass the San Francisco resolution supporting AB 5. Mandelman said he would be surprised if the resolution did not pass unanimously.
AB 5 passed the California State Assembly May 29 in a 53 to 11 The State Senate is scheduled to hold a hearing on the bill on July 10.