# California supreme court ruling could change everything...



## DeathByFlex (Nov 29, 2017)

From the article:

"In a big win for labor advocates, the California supreme court on Monday limited businesses from classifying workers as independent contractors who cannot receive key employment protections."​
This ruling could mean that Flex drivers are no longer independent contractors, but rather employees. It could also cause Amazon to reconsider if Flex is worth continuing in its current form.

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...california-gig-economy-ruling-dynamex-workers


----------



## Bygosh (Oct 9, 2016)

People are blowing this way out of proportion and are simply just not informed on all the issues.

The most important thing to consider is the arbitration agreement that every gig job has. This Summer the Supreme Court will likely rule that they are valid. Which means no class actions, meaning each case would have to be brought up individually outside the court system.

Then there is the fact that uber, Amazon etc could simply require you to setup your own business through the IRS. Takes about 5 mins online and boom bye bye CA law.

Worst case scenario (and I don't see this as likely) is all the gig companies just pull out of CA.

The real reason any state enacts laws like this is not because they give a shit about the workers it's simply the PAYROLL TAXES that they are not getting.

Also hope that everyone realizes you would make way way less money as an employee vs being a contractor. Sure you would get a few benefits but is that worth a 50% pay cut and losing the ability to choose when you work...


----------



## CatchyMusicLover (Sep 18, 2015)

Bygosh said:


> Sure you would get a few benefits but is that worth a 50% pay cut and losing the ability to choose when you work...


I dunno why people always assume "employee" means you wouldn't ever be able to choose when you work. That's emphatically false. It's usually true, but not always.


----------



## nighthawk398 (Jul 21, 2015)

As far as taxes go I think the IRS would consider us employees rather than independent contractors if they could I guess we'll see what happens


----------



## cvflexer (Apr 27, 2017)

CatchyMusicLover said:


> I dunno why people always assume "employee" means you wouldn't ever be able to choose when you work. That's emphatically false. It's usually true, but not always.


Tell your employer that you will not be in for work for at least 3 weeks because you feel like it. See if you are still employed after that.

When you are employed by someone, you are supposed to be there. Yes you may have some PTO or other benefits, but you have to be back there as soon as you run out of yhat. As an IC you only HAVE to be there for the CONTRACTED time and then it is up to you whether you want to be there again or not


----------



## CatchyMusicLover (Sep 18, 2015)

cvflexer said:


> Tell your employer that you will not be in for work for at least 3 weeks because you feel like it. See if you are still employed after that.
> 
> When you are employed by someone, you are supposed to be there. Yes you may have some PTO or other benefits, but you have to be back there as soon as you run out of yhat. As an IC you only HAVE to be there for the CONTRACTED time and then it is up to you whether you want to be there again or not


No, you're missing the point completely. The point is that it's not an /inherent trait/ of being an employee that you have to work when they tell you. There are jobs that exist where you get paid and taxed via a W2 where you can in some fashion set your own scheduale. I've worked two such a jobs in fact (been doing one for 9 years now....not that many hours a week but I don't have to work at all and can mix it up). Uber likes to tout out the myth but there's no reason they couldn't pay drivers as employees and keep the very same 'turn app on and off when you want' setup. Same with Flex.
Sure, MOST jobs aren't like that. I'm sure everyone would agree. But not all.


----------



## cvflexer (Apr 27, 2017)

Ok. Everyone should go tell their employer that you will only work whenever you feel like it.


----------



## grams777 (Jun 13, 2014)

One problem is there are usually costs for having an employee on the books whether they work or not. It can be for insurance, payroll, benefits or other costs. So generally once you’re an employee, the employer needs the amount of work you do to be worthwhile.

This can also be true as a contractor. In many places, if you stop accepting most or all the work offered to you they will stop offering you any work. I was a contractor for several limo and delivery type services. While there was some flexibility in hours, they all pretty much expected you to do a certain number of shifts or jobs that they needed each week. If you didn’t, you’re done. So a contractor perhaps gains some flexibility but it’s normally not even like these gig jobs.

And the gig jobs aren’t completely flexible either. While it’s true that you can be available to drive or open for shifts whenever you want, there may not be much or anything for you to do. It’s still got to coincide with what the demand is.

I can decide I’m going to drive for flex or Uber on mon- fri from 8am to 4pm. But I may just find myself tapping in vain for blocks or waiting for trips the whole time.

The other thing is even if the jobs did become employees, it’s not like every driver would now be an employee. It would be far too cost prohibitive to have so many employees on the books. What would happen is probably 95% of the contractors would be discontinued. Then a much smaller full time and perhaps some part time force would take their place. This would be similar to how the white vans work now.


----------



## CatchyMusicLover (Sep 18, 2015)

cvflexer said:


> Ok. Everyone should go tell their employer that you will only work whenever you feel like it.


Wow, can you really not read or are you just trolling?


----------



## Frœsty (Aug 14, 2016)

grams777 said:


> ...What would happen is probably 95% of the contractors would be discontinued. Then a much smaller, full-time and perhaps some part-time force would take their place. This would be similar to how the white vans work now.


I started having similar, less well-constructed, thoughts about this myself.

I am starting to see a very nasty constellation of points on the horizon. Thank gosh I did the vans before.


----------



## Cynergie (Apr 10, 2017)

Either Amazon accepts this ruling, takes on the 100k+ independent PT Flex drivers as employees--- and lose billions in future profit/astronomical growth in the process 

Or

Amazon fights the ruling, fires all it's Mom & Pop Flex/Prime delivery drivers. Recategorize it's white van fleet as full time employees or keep them as they are independent contractors (best case financially).

Either way, Besos is going to put the Amazon logo/brand on these white vans just before he anhilates FedEx, DHL, UPS for the cockroaches it views them to be. 

Regardless, the Flex gig appears to have run it's course. The cost of recategorizing us Flex as employees is too great an overhead cost for Amazon to bear long term.

This ruling has grave operational impacts for LyfUber as well


----------



## oicu812 (Aug 29, 2016)

Cynergie said:


> Recategorize it's white van fleet as full time employees or keep them as they are independent contractors (best case financially).


Nothing to recategorize for white van drivers. They are already employees of the companies that contract for Amazon. They get a paycheck from the company that hired them and not from Amazon. They are offered health coverage after so many days and maybe even 401k.


----------



## Bygosh (Oct 9, 2016)

Cynergie said:


> Either Amazon accepts this ruling, takes on the 100k+ independent PT Flex drivers as employees--- and lose billions in future profit/astronomical growth in the process
> 
> Or
> 
> ...


If I only read sensationalized headlines I would come to this conclusion as well. You should really research things before you go talking about things that you clearly only have a very basic understanding of.


----------



## Frœsty (Aug 14, 2016)

Bygosh said:


> If I only read sensationalized headlines I would come to this conclusion as well. You should really research things before you go talking about things that you clearly only have a very basic understanding of.


Care to elaborate? I would love some good news.


----------



## cvflexer (Apr 27, 2017)

Frœsty said:


> Care to elaborate? I would love some good news.


There is a thing called the Internet where a thing called Google exists and yo can find out for yourself.


----------



## Frœsty (Aug 14, 2016)

cvflexer said:


> There is a thing called the Internet where a thing called Google exists and yo can find out for yourself.


Know it. And did. Thanks for posting, though...


----------



## Cynergie (Apr 10, 2017)

oicu812 said:


> Nothing to recategorize for white van drivers. They are already employees of the companies that contract for Amazon. They get a paycheck from the company that hired them and not from Amazon. They are offered health coverage after so many days and maybe even 401k.


You just validated my earlier comment. I said the best case scenario financially is for Amazon to leave their white van operators as they currently are: as indpendent contractors. The only difference is putting the Amazon logo on the sides of those vans for branding/marketing/advertising purposes. Exactly the way Fed Ex & UPS work.

And yes what you said is true, particularly the benefits. As a former white van driver I can definitely attest to that.


----------



## KTMRacer (Oct 7, 2017)

We still have a gig with Amazon Flex and probably will for a few years to come. It will be up to attorneys and our judicial system to decide if Amazon Flex falls into this new ruling. Amazon doesn't deliver their packages, as it's not part of their companies services to do deliveries. That's why we can as independent contractors. UPS is a delivery service, so they cannot hire independent contractors to deliver packages. Again the courts may decide otherwise! I wouldn't be surprised if Amazon comes up with new guidelines and rules we must agree to and "sign."


----------



## cvflexer (Apr 27, 2017)

KTMRacer said:


> Amazon doesn't deliver their packages, as it's not part of their companies services to do deliveries. That's why we can as independent contractors. UPS is a delivery service, so they cannot hire independent contractors to deliver packages.


This is why this new CA Supreme Court ruling affects Uber and Lyft, not Amazon for now


----------



## oicu812 (Aug 29, 2016)

Cynergie said:


> I said the best case scenario financially is for Amazon to leave their white van operators as they currently are: as indpendent contractors. The only difference is putting the Amazon logo on the sides of those vans for branding/marketing/advertising purposes. Exactly the way Fed Ex & UPS work.


White van drivers are NOT independent contractors. As for branding, drivers are already wary of being followed like UPS drivers by thieves. Drivers do not want more scrutiny. They would rather advertise for Enterprise or UHAUL.


----------



## Juggalo9er (Dec 7, 2017)

Before you decide that the supreme case will turn it down, look what happened to ups in a similar ruling


----------



## Bygosh (Oct 9, 2016)

Juggalo9er said:


> Before you decide that the supreme case will turn it down, look what happened to ups in a similar ruling


US supreme court is 5-4 conservative right now. And conservatives sure do like to bend over for corporations.


----------



## Juggalo9er (Dec 7, 2017)

Bygosh said:


> US supreme court is 5-4 conservative right now. And conservatives sure do like to bend over for corporations.


I will remeber this the next time I visit Detroit, a liberal strong hold!


----------



## chuck finley (Aug 2, 2017)

Bygosh said:


> US supreme court is 5-4 conservative right now. And conservatives sure do like to bend over for corporations.


This is wrong. most corporations are in liberals cities.


----------



## Bygosh (Oct 9, 2016)

chuck finley said:


> This is wrong. most corporations are in liberals cities.


WTF does that have to do with the US Supreme Court... reading comprehension people...


----------

