Judge: California Ride-Hailing Law Is Unconstitutional

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A choose Friday struck down a California poll measure that exempted Uber and different app-based ride-hailing and supply companies from a state regulation requiring drivers to be categorised as workers eligible for advantages and job protections.

Alameda County Superior Court Judge Frank Roesch dominated that Proposition 22 was unconstitutional.

Voters authorised the measure in November after Uber, Lyft and different companies spent $200 million in its favor, making it the most costly poll measure in state historical past.

Uber mentioned it deliberate to attraction, organising a combat that would possible find yourself within the California Supreme Court.

“This ruling ignores the will of the overwhelming majority of California voters and defies both logic and the law,” firm spokesman Noah Edwardsen mentioned. “You don’t have to take our word for it: California’s attorney general strongly defended Proposition 22’s constitutionality in this very case.”

He mentioned the measure will stay in pressure pending the attraction.

The choose sided with three drivers and the Service Employees International Union in a lawsuit that argued the measure improperly eliminated the state Legislature’s potential to grant staff the fitting to entry to the state staff’ compensation program.

“For two years, drivers have been saying that democracy cannot be bought. And today’s decision shows they were right,” mentioned Bob Schoonover, president of the SEIU California State Council.

Proposition 2 shielded app-based ride-hailing and supply firms from a labor regulation that required such companies to deal with drivers as workers and never unbiased contractors, who don’t must obtain advantages corresponding to paid sick go away or unemployment insurance coverage.

Uber and Lyft threatened to depart the state if voters rejected the measure.

Labor spent about $20 million to problem the proposition.

The state Supreme Court initially declined to listen to the case in February — primarily on procedural grounds — however left open the potential of a decrease courtroom problem.

Source

Back to top button

Adblocker detected! Please consider reading this notice.

We've detected that you are using AdBlock Plus or some other adblocking software which is preventing the page from fully loading. We don't have any banner, Flash, animation, obnoxious sound, or popup ad. We do not implement these annoying types of ads! We need money to operate the site, and almost all of it comes from our online advertising. Please add www.postofasia.com to your ad blocking whitelist or disable your adblocking software.