A new coalition. the Massachusetts Coalition for Independent Work, is looking to keep drivers designated as independent contractors vs. employees
Four months after California voters approved a company-backed worker classification overhaul for app-based drivers, a similar debate that pivots on the interests of drivers and employers is coming into focus in Massachusetts.
Prominent ride-hailing and delivery service companies joined with business and community groups Wednesday to unveil the Massachusetts Coalition for Independent Work, which plans to fight to keep drivers designated as independent contractors rather than employees.
Their push could decide the employment classification for hundreds of thousands of Massachusetts workers, and it comes amid Attorney General Maura Healey’s ongoing lawsuit against Uber and Lyft alleging that the companies violate state wage and hour laws.
The coalition launched with 12 founding members: Uber, Lyft and DoorDash — who together spent more than $200 million campaigning in favor of the California ballot question — fellow gig economy power players Instacart and Postmates, the influential Associated Industries of Massachusetts and Massachusetts High Tech Council business groups, the Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts, Elevate Boston Foundation, College Bound Dorchester/Boston Uncornered, TechNet and The Internet Association.
The coalition cited a range of research, including a 2020 Lyft-backed public opinion poll as well as Bureau of Labor Statistics findings from 2017, concluding that many app-based workers would prefer to maintain their independent contractor status rather than become employees.
The coalition pointed to Proposition 22’s passage in California and called on Massachusetts lawmakers to find solutions “that provide independence plus benefits” to drivers.
“My family relies on my ability to work around our crowded schedules, which I’m able to do as an independent contractor,” DoorDash worker Yulimar Cordova, a Boston resident, said in a statement provided by the coalition. “Being an employee and having to fit a traditional work shift into our life won’t work for me. I want to be able to earn more benefits to further support my family needs, but my freedom and flexibility to work wherever, whenever and for how long I want has to be protected.”
“App-based work has been key for Black and Brown communities, who continue to suffer discrimination through traditional hiring practices,” added Keith Motley, president and CEO of the Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts.
Coalition spokesman Conor Yunits said it supports “legislative efforts to protect app-based workers’ independence while ensuring they gain access to benefits and protections.”
Cusack: Passing Bill Might Avert Legal, Ballot Fight
The group backs new legislation filed by Rep. Mark Cusack of Braintree and Rep. Carlos Gonzalez of Springfield, which would change state law to ensure that all app-based drivers are designated independent contractors and not employees so long as the company does not “unilaterally prescribe” hours or times for work or terminate a worker for declining a specific ride or delivery request.
Cusack told the News Service that he worked with coalition members and other stakeholders to craft the bill, adding that his “door’s always open” and that lawmakers will “take anyone’s feedback.”
The bill (HD 2582) would also require companies to create “portable benefit accounts” for their drivers. Each company would contribute an amount equal to 4 percent of an eligible driver’s quarterly earnings to an account for that driver, who could then transfer its funds to a retirement account or pay for health insurance in the individual market.
“The key theme on both sides of the ledger here, I’ll say, is flexibility,” Cusack said.
On the same day that the coalition launched, the Boston Independent Drivers Guild said it plans a protest outside the State House on Thursday in opposition to Cusack and Gonzalez’s bill.
The group, whose members joined Healey at the press conference where she unveiled her lawsuit in July, said the proposal would keep drivers’ income below minimum wage and prevent them from accessing certain rights.
Boston Independent Drivers Guild has filed its own bill – a rideshare driver bill of rights
The group has filed its own bill (SD 2359) – a rideshare driver bill of rights – that would pay drivers a minimum wage of $20 per hour plus expenses, enshrine their rights to unionize and access employee benefits, guarantee minimum hours and more.
BIDG Executive Director Henry De Groot said in an interview that although not all drivers support the bill, the 800-member group contacted drivers across the state to solicit their feedback as it crafted the proposal.
The bill, he said, is “an attempt to take the fight to Uber and Lyft.”
“It’s a false dichotomy, it’s a lie, to say that drivers can only have either flexibility or basic worker rights,” De Groot said. “We can have both. Our bill gives drivers both.”
De Groot filed his bill himself as a citizen’s petition. Asked why no lawmaker filed it on his behalf, he responded, “no comment” before adding that he is “confident we will have sponsors on this legislation.”
After passage of Proposition 22, which rewrote California state law to deem app-based drivers as contractors in the face of a worker misclassification lawsuit from the state attorney general, Uber in particular was clear that it would seek similar reforms across the country.
The company said it hoped to achieve similar reforms in Massachusetts by working with lawmakers rather than through the ballot question process.
Healey filed her lawsuit against Uber and Lyft in July, alleging that the companies pocketed “hundreds of millions” of dollars annually by deeming their drivers to be independent contractors instead of employees who have access to minimum wages, paid sick leave and other benefits.
How Massachusetts law decides whether someone is an independent contractor
Massachusetts law has a three-pronged test, often referred to as the “ABC Test,” to determine when a company can designate a worker as a contractor.
In California, Attorney General Xavier Becerra sued the companies on similar grounds before the passage of Proposition 22 rewrote state law and allowed continued use of independent contractors.
Cusack’s goal, he said, is to preempt a potentially costly ballot question campaign like that in California or a protracted legal battle.
“This issue isn’t new, but the stepped-up legal challenges and ballot measures have certainly been growing in the last couple of years,” Cusack said. “That’s why it’s important to get out ahead of this as much as possible and see if we can move with a solution rather than fight it out in courts or at the ballot box.”
Mark Gallagher, MHTC’s vice president for policy and government affairs, said in a statement that app-based companies have brought significant economic growth and transportation connectivity to Massachusetts, particularly during the pandemic.
“We need to ensure that these opportunities continue to grow, rather than limit them by trying to fit a new shape into an old box,” Gallagher said in a statement. “The legislation finds an effective middle ground and ensures that workers have more support, without sacrificing economic opportunity.”
According to the coalition, more than 54 percent of app-based workers in Massachusetts work less than five hours per week, while 83 percent use the apps less than 15 hours per week.
