Judge halts California "gig worker" law from taking effect for truckers

[PeteS in CA]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/judge-halts-california-gig-economy-law-from-taking-effect-for-truckers/

Judge halts California "gig worker" law from taking effect for truckers

A federal judge has temporarily blocked a new California labor law from impacting more than 70,000 independent truckers. The law, passed late last year, makes it harder for companies to classify workers as independent contractors instead of employees, who are entitled to minimum wage and benefits such as workers compensation.

U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez ... granted a temporary restraining order sought by the California Trucking Association while he considers imposing a permanent injunction.

He said the association is likely to eventually prevail on its argument that the state law violates federal law. He also ruled the truckers would otherwise be likely to suffer irreparable harm, and that temporarily blocking the law from applying to truckers is in the public interest.
...
The trucking association's lawsuit, filed in November, said many truckers would have to abandon $150,000 investments in clean trucks and the right to set their own schedules in order for companies to comply with AB5, which the group says illegally infringes on interstate commerce.

The main targets of this law were outfits like Uber and Lyft. Those companies bypassed cities' and taxi medallion holders' little city-enforced oligopoly. But so as not to have constitutionalty problems, this attack-law was written more broadly, and, unsurprisingly, ensnared many more folks than just the targets. This challenge to the law is pretty narrow, specific to Federally regulated truckers.

[don-o]

I listen to the Trucker's channel XM148 and they have been all over this matter. I believe there is similar legislation in Illinois and maybe NJ. Good to see some sanity from the federal judiciary for a change.

[Cyber Liberty]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/judge-halts-california-gig-economy-law-from-taking-effect-for-truckers/

Judge halts California "gig worker" law from taking effect for truckers

The main targets of this law were outfits like Uber and Lyft. Those companies bypassed cities' and taxi medallion holders' little city-enforced oligopoly. But so as not to have constitutionalty problems, this attack-law was written more broadly, and, unsurprisingly, ensnared many more folks than just the targets. This challenge to the law is pretty narrow, specific to Federally regulated truckers.

I have Bookface friends who are truckers, and this California law has them freaking out.  It would freeze out a huge section of the public, for an issue that has a million Federal hooks in it.  It's difficult to imagine a law that's a less-clear example of violating "Interstate Commerce."

[PeteS in CA]

I have Bookface friends who are truckers, and this California law has them freaking out.  It would freeze out a huge section of the public, for an issue that has a million Federal hooks in it.  It's difficult to imagine a law that's a less-clear example of violating "Interstate Commerce."

As I mentioned in the OP, the target of the law - I do mean target - was outfits like Uber and Lyft, who screwed up major cities' taxi medallion oligopoly-racket. But because the law couldn't target the companies by name or business plan, it was written broadly, and folks as varied as indie truckers and free-lance writers got ensnared. I suppose it's a case of the Law of Unintended Consequences, but the Sacto-Idiots are so hostile to business that I wonder about the "Unintended" part.

[skeeter]

As I mentioned in the OP, the target of the law - I do mean target - was outfits like Uber and Lyft, who screwed up major cities' taxi medallion oligopoly-racket. But because the law couldn't target the companies by name or business plan, it was written broadly, and folks as varied as indie truckers and free-lance writers got ensnared. I suppose it's a case of the Law of Unintended Consequences, but the Sacto-Idiots are so hostile to business that I wonder about the "Unintended" part.

The hair salon industry is freaking out as well. Most stylists who rent stations are now considered W2 employees as well and most owners can no longer afford to run their businesses.

[Wingnut]

I have Bookface friends who are truckers,

I'm not big on social graces
Think I'll slip on down to the oasis.....

[PeteS in CA]

The hair salon industry is freaking out as well. Most stylists who rent stations are now considered W2 employees as well and most owners can no longer afford to run their businesses.

 

That points to an analogous situation I was wondering about. I think personal trainers at gyms (e.g. 24 Hour Fitness) are/were also contractors. Without having spoken to one, I suspect they, too, are in turmoil over this law. I wonder, too, about caterers, who have limited employee staff and hire temps as needed for events.