About prop #22. (health insurance, credit card, how much)

[CALGUY]

This is the proposition that independent drivers want the voters to vote yes on, so drivers can remain independent, without being an employee of a company.

The prop also stipulates that these drivers would get health benefits if this prop passes.

My question is, who would be paying for these health benefits?
If it is the company they are associated with, then they are in fact employees of that company.
A company can't just decide to pay health benefits to a bunch of people who are not employed by them, and if these people are employed, or contracted by a company, then they are employees of that company.

Also, I would bet the majority of these independent drivers pay no tax on their earnings, and do not declare all they make, if they do pay taxes.
And if you tell me the companies who contract with these drivers make sure taxes are being paid, then again, these drivers are NOT independent drivers, they are employees of the companies.
I will be voting a big NO on prop #22.

[NorCalMan]

Originally Posted by CALGUY

This is the proposition that independent drivers want the voters to vote yes on, so drivers can remain independent, without being an employee of a company.

The prop also stipulates that these drivers would get health benefits if this prop passes.

My question is, who would be paying for these health benefits?
If it is the company they are associated with, then they are in fact employees of that company.
A company can't just decide to pay health benefits to a bunch of people who are not employed by them, and if these people are employed, or contracted by a company, then they are employees of that company.

Also, I would bet the majority of these independent drivers pay no tax on their earnings, and do not declare all they make, if they do pay taxes.
And if you tell me the companies who contract with these drivers make sure taxes are being paid, then again, these drivers are NOT independent drivers, they are employees of the companies.
I will be voting a big NO on prop #22.

Who would be paying for these health benefits? Well, the riders of course, in the form of higher travel fees. No different than $15hr minimum wages. Prices went up AND people got laid off due to automation. I'll be voting yes. You don't move to a town that has a train running through it and then complain to the city council that there's a train making noise running through the middle of town. You knew there was a train before you moved, trains make noise, what did you expect?

[Texamichiforniasota]

It's not the drivers pushing for prop 22, it's the companies. Uber, Lyft, Door Dash, Instacart, etc have poured over $180 million into the Yes on 22 campaign, including setting up and funding astroturf (fake grass roots) organizations to make it look like drivers are in favor.

A California Supreme Court decision ruled that the drivers are an integral part of the business, and as such are employees and not independent contractors. The companies are trying to undo that decision at the ballot box so they won't have to pay drivers more.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by CALGUY

And if you tell me the companies who contract with these drivers make sure taxes are being paid, then again, these drivers are NOT independent drivers, they are employees of the companies.

I agree that it's confusing to read that independent contractors would be considered to be eligible for health insurance. The proposition reads:

Since Proposition 22 would consider app-based drivers to be independent contractors and not employees, state employment-related labor laws would not cover app-based drivers. Proposition 22 would enact labor and wage policies that are specific to app-based drivers and companies, including...

...and it goes on to list health insurance--depending on how many hours the independent contractor works, accident insurance, etc.

https://ballotpedia.org/California_P...itiative_(2020)

[wac_432]

Yes on 22 will help get us self-driving taxis sooner since, they'll be MUCH cheaper than human-driven cars. The market needs this kick in the pants to quit idling along. I want self-driving cars to be the norm before my kids turn 16!

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by CALGUY

This is the proposition that independent drivers want the voters to vote yes on, so drivers can remain independent, without being an employee of a company.

The prop also stipulates that these drivers would get health benefits if this prop passes.

My question is, who would be paying for these health benefits?
If it is the company they are associated with, then they are in fact employees of that company.
A company can't just decide to pay health benefits to a bunch of people who are not employed by them, and if these people are employed, or contracted by a company, then they are employees of that company.

Also, I would bet the majority of these independent drivers pay no tax on their earnings, and do not declare all they make, if they do pay taxes.
And if you tell me the companies who contract with these drivers make sure taxes are being paid, then again, these drivers are NOT independent drivers, they are employees of the companies.
I will be voting a big NO on prop #22.

Almost any place that is cash only, pays their employees cash, aren't reporting income. If you are leaving a tip in cash it probably won't be reported. A prime example are all those "businesses" that use illegals for day labor and pay them cash. You can bet none of that ever makes a tax form.

[CALGUY]

Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer

Almost any place that is cash only, pays their employees cash, aren't reporting income. If you are leaving a tip in cash it probably won't be reported. A prime example are all those "businesses" that use illegals for day labor and pay them cash. You can bet none of that ever makes a tax form.

So why add one more non tax paying group to the situation?

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by CALGUY

So why add one more non tax paying group to the situation?

If you are tipping them cash it doesn't make a bit of difference. It won't be reported. They are already there.

Wasn't the app already recording fees for the rides? I would think that part was already taxable with records. Electronic tips were already recorded. Yes or no on this cash tips won't be taxed. Cash fares I'd guess the same.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by wac_432

Yes on 22 will help get us self-driving taxis sooner since, they'll be MUCH cheaper than human-driven cars. The market needs this kick in the pants to quit idling along. I want self-driving cars to be the norm before my kids turn 16!

Every parent feels that way at first until you realize they are mostly all, or will be, fairly good drivers. Much more so than the blue hairs, illegals and entitled sports car drivers.

[tstieber]

If companies voluntarily gave benefits to their independent contractors, that wouldn't automatically change them to employees. You could give any perks you'd like to independent contractors, or to part-time employees, even if those perks aren't mandatory. But I think the law actually would be much better if we did require certain benefits for independent contractors who work a large number of hours for a company, and if companies guaranteed independent contractors a minimum wage so that they don't carry such an enormous burden of being underpaid. Basically to help limit the downside to the workers and share in the burdens as well as the benefits.
But the question of being "essential" is really tangential to the definition of independent contractor status IMO. It's really about the work relationship and not the type of work. Independent contractors can choose to work as much or as little as they like, they could decline work they're not interested in, they can fulfill the work the way they want to, and they have the upside potential of making way more than the prevailing wage. That arrangement isn't bad per se, just different than an employee, and both have pros and cons. If everyone were suddenly an employee, then the companies works have all the control over what schedule you have to work, exactly how much you make per hour, where you have to be, and what you have to do. They would call all the shots, and that means you couldn't just drive for Uber whenever you have extra time or feel like it -- you would have to commit to the schedule and routes they give you. Pros and cons.
However, it should be noted that independent contractors do pay income taxes, just not payroll taxes like Medicare. Uber isn't cash based, either, bc they wouldn't make any money that way. They charge the customer's credit card on file, and they give a Form 1099 to the contractor with their total earnings for the year, like a W-2. The independent contractor has to pay income taxes on those earnings already. That part doesn't change. As for tips, they are supposed to be reported, but if customers pay cash, they may not be. That isn't any different between either either classification though...
Personally, I think it's good to have the option of an independent contractor setup where it's the best option for both sides, rather than forcing everyone into one clarification. But independent contractor requirements can be modified to help workers too. So I would be in favor of independent contractor "reform."
Right now, the law is so messed up. If Uber and Lyft win this at the ballot, then they will join like sixty different industries that have already been able to negotiate exemptions from the law. What kind of law doesn't apply to dozens of miscellaneous industries? That's just weird. They really need to modify and streamline this law so that there is one standard that works for everyone. And they should treat small businesses more leniently than large ones, so that we don't lose Main Street to Wall Street and end up with only bland big corporate businesses.
Lots to think about, but I can't imagine AB5 could be the final word on this topic given how badly executed it is.