# Uber and Unemployment Insurance for drivers affected by the CV19 slow down.



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Drivers who are not working because of CV19, should immediately file for unemployment insurance benefits.

The states need to know how drivers are affected.

Unemployment Insurance benefits are NOT paid for by drivers. They are paid in totality by the employer.

If you file and are denied. Appeal.

You will then get an appeal over the phone. If denied again. Appeal again.

You will then appear before a live judge. This is your final and best chance to make your claim.

Drivers in all states should file and argue they are missclassified employees.

Drivers in California, especially are now considered employees because of AB 5.

Drivers in New York have also been ruled eligible for unemployment insurance by the state.

All drivers in every state should file for unemployment insurance regardless of how they are classified.

















At the moment, drivers have Uber over a barrel. Take advantage of it.

You may not get another chance.


----------



## Reynob Moore (Feb 17, 2017)

Argue that we are misclassified employees? The classification is what it is. Arguing wont make them change anything.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Reynob Moore said:


> Argue that we are misclassified employees? The classification is what it is. Arguing wont make them change anything.


In California you are already an employee because of AB 5.

Drivers in other states may be misclassified.


----------



## JustTreatMeFair (Nov 28, 2017)

Reynob Moore said:


> Argue that we are misclassified employees? The classification is what it is. Arguing wont make them change anything.


or it will?

Arguments were made in two states where it was determined they are misclassified. It worked there.

The real problem with this argument is that unemployment is for people that are working and then an employer let's them go for some reason. Has anyone been terminated by UBER for lack of business? Rideshare as a business has collapsed. There is not a lot UBER or Lyft can do to stimulate it at the moment.

If UBER were to "close" then maybe you could make an argument.

The only real argument here is for a minimum wage to be paid to drivers.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

JustTreatMeFair said:


> or it will?
> 
> Arguments were made in two states where it was determined they are misclassified. It worked there.
> 
> ...


No, Unemployment Insurance is also for when employees are cut back hours.

It can be partial.



JustTreatMeFair said:


> or it will?
> 
> Arguments were made in two states where it was determined they are misclassified. It worked there.
> 
> ...


----------



## JustTreatMeFair (Nov 28, 2017)

Thank-you. I did not know that


----------



## Greenfox (Sep 12, 2019)

they ain't giving up NOTHING, SomEONE please post info if u actually do this during this hoax nonsense. thanks,


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Greenfox said:


> they ain't giving up NOTHING, SomEONE please post info if u actually do this during this hoax nonsense. thanks,


It's not up to Uber to give up anything.

EDD will pay out then charge Ubers EDD account.



JustTreatMeFair said:


> Thank-you. I did not know that


I just realized you are in Texas.

My info is for California not sure if it applies in TX.



JustTreatMeFair said:


> Thank-you. I did not know that


Actually it appears the same is true in TX.


----------



## 58756 (May 30, 2016)

Minnesota unemployed insurance is easy to get now, they don't care if Uber was your latest gig, they go by balance they have for you. Usually past real jobs you had will have accrued balance for you. I once lived on unemployment insulation for 3 years thanks to Obama's extensions


----------



## tohunt4me (Nov 23, 2015)

Ozzyoz said:


> Minnesota unemployed insurance is easy to get now, they don't care if Uber was your latest gig, they go by balance they have for you. Usually past real jobs you had will have accrued balance for you. I once lived on unemployment insulation for 3 years thanks to Obama's extensions


WHAT IS THE " R- VALUE" of this " UNEMPLOYMENT INSULATION" ?


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/Lyft-Uber-drivers-seek-sick-leave-during-15139279.php


----------



## Mash Ghasem (Jan 12, 2020)

observer said:


> Drivers who are not working because of CV13...


CV13?? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Franklin_(CV-13)


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Mash Ghasem said:


> CV13??
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Franklin_(CV-13)
> View attachment 432994


I guess I was thinking Friday the 13.


----------



## 58756 (May 30, 2016)

tohunt4me said:


> WHAT IS THE " R- VALUE" of this " UNEMPLOYMENT INSULATION" ?
> View attachment 432965


Typo, meant INSURANCE


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

??? You cannot continue to drive and collect Unemployment Benefits. I believe that in order to even be considered, you would have to be able to prove that you have been deactivated by U/L. and no longer have access to driving for them. 
Just because there is no business and a driver is making no money DOES NOT make them eligible to collect benefits.


----------



## 58756 (May 30, 2016)

KK2929 said:


> ??? You cannot continue to drive and collect Unemployment Benefits. I believe that in order to even be considered, you would have to be able to prove that you have been deactivated by U/L. and no longer have access to driving for them.
> Just because there is no business and a driver is making no money DOES NOT make them eligible to collect benefits.


You can still collect so long as you're earning below a certain rate.


----------



## KK2929 (Feb 9, 2017)

observer said:


> https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/Lyft-Uber-drivers-seek-sick-leave-during-15139279.php


------------------------
Full article is below. I do not think that request will get court approval. Uber has already set up a fund for drivers who get COVID-19. And paying something called " sick fee, sick pay or sick leave " may be considered by the courts as admitting that we are employees, even though AB5 in Calif, states that we are, the classification is still up for debate. Uber/Lyft will never do something that may cause them problems in the future. 
---------------
www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/lyft-uber-drivers-seek-sick-leave-during-pandemic-or-else-i-m-not-stopping-fever-or-no-fever/ar-BB11ldFtber drivers seek sick leave during pandemic, or else: 'I'm not stopping, fever or no fever'

Drivers for Uber and Lyft are asking a San Francisco judge to order the ride-hailing companies to pay them sick leave - as employees, not contractors - to protect both their customers and the public from possible exposure to the coronavirus.

Uber and Lyft signage seen on a car parked on Fulton at Laguna streets on Wednesday, Jan. 29, 2020, in San Francisco, Calif.

Without paid leave, drivers "will need to work while sick to make ends meet," a lawyer for Lyft drivers in California said in a filing late Tuesday in San Francisco Superior Court.

"I can't self-quarantine because not working is not an option," an unnamed Lyft driver was quoted as saying in a court declaration. "If I don't make enough money, I can't feed my children for the next six weeks. I'm not stopping, fever or no fever."

A similar filing was being submitted on behalf of Uber drivers, said attorney Shannon Liss-Riordan. Both ask the judge for a hearing Thursday morning on an injunction that would require the companies to treat the drivers as employees for the purposes of sick-leave benefits.

In response, Uber and Lyft both noted that they have agreed to sick-leave pay for drivers who have been diagnosed with the virus or placed under quarantine. Uber also makes payments to drivers who have been removed from work because of medical symptoms.

Julie Wood, a spokeswoman for Lyft, also said that "the vast majority of people who earn by driving on our platform use Lyft to supplement existing income" from other jobs.

But Liss-Riordan said the benefits paid by both companies are less generous, and less reliable, than sick leave that state law requires for employees. In her court filing, she asserted that the company "should not get to decide what level of compliance with workplace protections it deems sufficient."

The companies classify their thousands of drivers as independent contractors who are ineligible for the benefits state law mandates for employees, including minimum wages, overtime, paid leave, and reimbursement for work expenses, such as fuel costs.

AB5, a California law that took effect this year, classifies workers as employees if they are in the same business as the companies they work for. Uber and Lyft contend their business is not transportation, but merely connecting drivers and passengers, an assessment rejected by several federal judges - most recently U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg of San Francisco, who said in an Uber case last Friday that the company's description "strains credulity, given the company advertises itself as a 'transportation system.' "

But no judge has yet decided whether AB5 applies to Uber and Lyft. The companies are investing millions in a proposed November ballot initiative that would exempt them from AB5.

Both companies have also contended their drivers' contracts require any workplace disputes to be resolved by arbitrators, not judges. In Tuesday's filing, Liss-Riordan contended the public-interest injunction she seeks is legally exempt from arbitration, and that the federal law mandating arbitration in such cases does not apply to transportation workers.



observer said:


> In California you are already an employee because of AB 5.
> 
> Drivers in other states may be misclassified.


-----------------------------
Since AB5 has not changed anything for Ride Share drivers, I have to question your statement.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

KK2929 said:


> ------------------------
> Full article is below. I do not think that request will get court approval. Uber has already set up a fund for drivers who get COVID-19. And paying something called " sick fee, sick pay or sick leave " may be considered by the courts as admitting that we are employees, even though AB5 in Calif, states that we are, the classification is still up for debate. Uber/Lyft will never do something that may cause them problems in the future.
> ---------------
> www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/lyft-uber-drivers-seek-sick-leave-during-pandemic-or-else-i-m-not-stopping-fever-or-no-fever/ar-BB11ldFtber drivers seek sick leave during pandemic, or else: 'I'm not stopping, fever or no fever'
> ...


AB5 is a state law. Uber/Lyft tried multiple times from which to to be exempted. They were denied every time.

They filed for an injuction against AB5 and were again denied by a federal judge.

https://techcrunch.com/2020/02/10/j...ction-against-californias-gig-worker-law/amp/
As things stand now drivers are employees.


----------



## nj9000 (Jun 6, 2019)

But I don't want to be an employee? It could lead to my hours being dictated to me. Might as well get a normal job at that point


----------



## Coyotex (Feb 10, 2019)

If I'm an Uber employee, why did I have to file self employment taxes? I didn't get a W2 from Uber, did anyone?


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Coyotex said:


> If I'm an Uber employee, why did I have to file self employment taxes? I didn't get a W2 from Uber, did anyone?


W-2s have nothing to do with unemployment insurance. Unemployment insurance is paid by Uber not the drivers.

One thing I forgot to mention.

The governor of California has waived the one week waiting period for unemployment benefits because of CV19.


----------



## doyousensehumor (Apr 13, 2015)

observer said:


> Drivers who are not working because of CV13, should immediately file for unemployment insurance benefits.
> 
> The states need to know how drivers are affected.
> 
> ...


I am to proud, too stubborn, to chase aid like that.

Some of the creativity, the persistence, of pursuing benifits; as well as engineering, and analyzing what corporations "ought" to be doing, is on a level that could be described as talent.

Call it skills; those skills IF directed in a more positive direction, could become more beneficial than any of the changes upon others you seek.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

doyousensehumor said:


> I am to proud, too stubborn, to chase aid like that.
> 
> Some of the creativity, the persistence, of pursuing benifits; as well as engineering, and analyzing what corporations "ought" to be doing, is on a level that could be described as talent.
> 
> Call it skills; those skills IF directed in a more positive direction, could become more beneficial than any of the changes upon others you seek.


I wasn't too proud.

It's not a matter of what Uber ought to do or not, it's a matter of they are required to abide by laws and they feel they are exempt from ALL laws, not just employment laws.

I worked for my company 23 years.

I earned every penny I got from unemployment benefits.

All Nine Thousand Dollars of it.

Yes, I had to fight for it through three appeals but in the end,

I won.


----------



## 58756 (May 30, 2016)

observer said:


> W-2s have nothing to do with unemployment insurance. Unemployment insurance is paid by Uber not the drivers.
> 
> One thing I forgot to mention.
> 
> The governor of California has waived the one week waiting period for unemployment benefits because of CV19.


No UI isn't paid by Uber, it is collective UI taxes that the state has collected from various employers you had. That is why you can still drive Uber and make 100 or $200 a week and still get UI because you would be making way less than your standard UI weekly balance.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

Ozzyoz said:


> No UI isn't paid by Uber, it is collective UI taxes that the state has collected from various employers you had. That is why you can still drive Uber and make 100 or $200 a week and still get UI because you would be making way less than your standard UI weekly balance.


That is true for part time and drivers who have only worked for Uber for a short time. These drivers would still be eligible for unemployment insurance.

Uber is responsible for its share of UI that it should have been paying all along.


----------



## BjonesTN90 (Mar 5, 2020)

observer said:


> Drivers who are not working because of CV13, should immediately file for unemployment insurance benefits.
> 
> The states need to know how drivers are affected.
> 
> ...


With grease or not?


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

observer said:


> Drivers who are not working because of CV13, should immediately file for unemployment insurance benefits.
> 
> The states need to know how drivers are affected.
> 
> ...


Ah, I'm in California, we are not classified as employees yet, there's a lawsuit happening. I really hope UBer wins this one, I do not want to be an 'employee'.



observer said:


> AB5 is a state law. Uber/Lyft tried multiple times from which to to be exempted. They were denied every time.
> 
> They filed for an injuction against AB5 and were again denied by a federal judge.
> 
> ...


I"ve yet to fill out a W2 form, have anyone in CA done this?


----------



## Coachman (Sep 22, 2015)

I drove tonight for two hours and earned $18 per hour. I'm not going to file a false claim for unemployment.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

https://www.politico.com/states/new...xtend-benefits-to-gig-economy-workers-1267676


----------



## Sweetpete57 (Mar 1, 2020)

I'm not sure how you can collect unemployment, considering Uber hasn't fired anyone. Uber is still up and running but we're making the choice (and a very smart choice at that) not to drive during the pandemic. I don't see how choosing not to work allows us to collect unemployment. Hey, we'll be getting some Trump checks here in a few weeks anyway!


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

nj9000 said:


> But I don't want to be an employee? It could lead to my hours being dictated to me. Might as well get a normal job at that point


Yupp, you could make that choice it's up to you.



Oscar Levant said:


> Ah, I'm in California, we are not classified as employees yet, there's a lawsuit happening. I really hope UBer wins this one, I do not want to be an 'employee'.
> 
> 
> I"ve yet to fill out a W2 form, have anyone in CA done this?


Which lawsuit?

This one?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcr...ction-against-californias-gig-worker-law/amp/
Uber lost.


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

observer said:


> Drivers who are not working because of CV19, should immediately file for unemployment insurance benefits.
> 
> The states need to know how drivers are affected.
> 
> ...


In NJ employees DO pay into UI. Do not assume every state us like yours.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

SuzeCB said:


> In NJ employees DO pay into UI. Do not assume every state us like yours.


I made a mistake the OP should have read New York not New Jersey. I went back and corrected it.

However, New Jersey is going after Uber for not paying unemployment and disability.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily...650-million-employment-tax-bill-in-new-jersey


----------



## SuzeCB (Oct 30, 2016)

observer said:


> I made a mistake the OP should have read New York not New Jersey. I went back and corrected it.
> 
> However, New Jersey is going after Uber for not paying unemployment and disability.
> 
> https://news.bloomberglaw.com/daily...650-million-employment-tax-bill-in-new-jersey


Yeah, but then the drivers won't have paid their share, either. What do you think will happen then?


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

observer said:


> Yupp, you could make that choice it's up to you.
> 
> 
> Which lawsuit?
> ...


UBer will wiggle out of it, somehow. Probably.


----------



## Oscar Levant (Aug 15, 2014)

observer said:


> Yupp, you could make that choice it's up to you.
> 
> 
> Which lawsuit?
> ...


Haven't been asked to fill out a W2 yet, so I dunno.



observer said:


> AB5 is a state law. Uber/Lyft tried multiple times from which to to be exempted. They were denied every time.
> 
> They filed for an injuction against AB5 and were again denied by a federal judge.
> 
> ...


Uber has yet to send me a W2 to fill out and I'm still cashing out daily. That would stop if I were an 'employee'.

I'm betting that Uber is going to defy it, 'cause they're so big, tons of lawyers ( which is how they turned what was essentially a ********* company into a new class Transportation Network company, the result of lots of legal muscle on the PUC ) I think they will wiggle out of it somehow. They are pong to put a proposition on the Nov ballot, and, because Uber is popular, Uber will probably win. I do hope they do, I like cash daily, and NOT being an employee, despite the fact that collecting Unemployment is harder as a 1099er.


----------



## DentonLyfter (Apr 14, 2018)

Texas isn’t going to pay any ride share, or food deliverer driver a penny in unemployment. Regardless of how many “appeals” you propose. And I’m pretty sure that applies to at least 48 other states.


----------



## IRME4EVER (Feb 17, 2020)

observer said:


> W-2s have nothing to do with unemployment insurance. Unemployment insurance is paid by Uber not the drivers.
> 
> One thing I forgot to mention.
> 
> The governor of California has waived the one week waiting period for unemployment benefits because of CV19.


WHAT ABOUT ARIZONA? DOWN FROM 800.00 A WEEK TO BARELY 200.00.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

SuzeCB said:


> Yeah, but then the drivers won't have paid their share, either. What do you think will happen then?


A couple things could happen.

One, they charge the drivers for their share.

Two, they charge Uber for the missed drivers payments that should have been deducted.

640 million dollars is way more than the state paid out in Unemployment benefits.



Oscar Levant said:


> Haven't been asked to fill out a W2 yet, so I dunno.
> 
> 
> Uber has yet to send me a W2 to fill out and I'm still cashing out daily. That would stop if I were an 'employee'.
> ...


A W-2 is for taxes and has nothing to do with filing for unemployment.

You are making money now, who knows what it will be like in a couple weeks.



DentonLyfter said:


> Texas isn't going to pay any ride share, or food deliverer driver a penny in unemployment. Regardless of how many "appeals" you propose. And I'm pretty sure that applies to at least 48 other states.


I believe you are right Uber sent its lobbyists and had a ruling passed that specifically states that Uber drivers are ineligible for unemployment.

If it was me, I'd apply and appeal every time. That's EXACTLY how Uber does it. They appeal every single time.

The three member board that approved that ruling needs to know how it is affecting workers. I'd also notify all my state legislators.

Read this,

https://www.texasobserver.org/are-s...nsible-for-a-mysterious-new-texas-labor-rule/
And contact your state legislator.



IRME4EVER said:


> WHAT ABOUT ARIZONA? DOWN FROM 800.00 A WEEK TO BARELY 200.00.


Arizona is another state that is antiworker. Governor Ducey was in bed with Uber before he was elected.

Again, file. Appeal. Appeal. Appeal.

Contact your legislator.

They need to know how this is affecting you. The more drivers that file, the better.

Don't wait till it slows down more. This slowdown could last several months.


----------



## JustTreatMeFair (Nov 28, 2017)

Uber did not send anyone to make drivers ineligible.

UBER set up the business model and convinced millions of drivers, not smart enough to understand the overall implications, that they are independent contractors. Once they sold it to drivers by the millions they were able to leave the cost of insurance for employees out of their business model and it does not factor into the charges they have for the services WE provide.

Independent contractors have, do and will continue to exist in many capacities. It is a personal choice everyone has as to how to set up their personally owned "business".

You can choose to operate in a variety of ways. You COULD register as a business, Get a Taxpayer ID, pay yourself a paycheck every week and deduct taxes from your check. 

On Federal contribution, FUTA, you would pay about 6 cents on every dollar you pay yourself into the unemployment pool but only on the first $7000. So about $420 would go INTO the system. You get a Tax credit for a lot of that. State rate, SUTA, in Texas is 6.36% of the first $9000 paid to every employee. So another $572.40 max per employee. 

Basically it would have cost UBER $992.40 per employee, per year to cover the driver for unemployment. You could do that for yourself operating AS A BUSINESS which is what you have chosen to do as an Independent Contractor.

You would have other "taxes" on you though such as federal and state contributions to programs such as medicare and social security.

Everyone shocked today that they do not get to draw unemployment will be shocked later in life when the fact that they take every tax deduction to avoid claiming income also affects their contribution to Social Security which is paid out at retirement based on what you have paid into the system. In 2020, taking a check at the earliest age in my case would mean receiving $2857 a month for the rest of my life. I paid into the system over the years the maximum amounts. 

My wife's grandmother gets a monthly SSI check of only $186 because for most of her life she was a stay at home mother or worked jobs never paying into the system.

Choosing to be self employed and properly contributing would mean another 10-11% of your earning going to the govt. Paying yourself as an employee of YOUR company would increase that to about 14%. 

EDUCATED people understand all this and make decisions with all the information. Ignorant people don't worry about such things.

Back to topic and to summarize. Uber does not send it's lobbyists to have rulings made specifically states that Uber drivers are ineligible for unemployment. 

Uber aggressively defends the business model they created and the FACT that UBER Drivers AGREE to terms that place them in the system as Independent Contractors to avoid those needed contributions which would amount to about $1000 a year per person to cover UI and another 7.5% of every dollar Drivers earn to cover their share of SSI.

They will continue to do so for as long as the lemmings blindly log on and drive.

WHat will come of all of this suffering drivers endure during the Pandemic is a tremendous amount of public exposure, lot's of talk about needing to change it and PROBABLY a return to old ways and forgotten hardships soon after it all dies down.

Unless of course drivers build a voice and keep the message alive.

Previous strikes meant little as the exposure was limited. If Rideshare drivers got in their cars and organized and drove down the empty streets of every major city in the country in defiance of bans and orders to remain at home as a Protest of the hardships they face without UI it would most definitely get noticed


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

JustTreatMeFair said:


> Uber did not send anyone to make drivers ineligible.
> 
> UBER set up the business model and convinced millions of drivers, not smart enough to understand the overall implications, that they are independent contractors. Once they sold it to drivers by the millions they were able to leave the cost of insurance for employees out of their business model and it does not factor into the charges they have for the services WE provide.
> 
> ...


While I agree with most of what you state Uber, Lyft, Handy and other app based companies do send out lobbyists to change regulations in their favor.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.te...ators-lobbyists-rewrite-rule-gig-economy/amp/


----------



## JustTreatMeFair (Nov 28, 2017)

I agree. Here in Texas though they did not "change" anything. What they did was push a group of impressionable people to make a determination ahead of a major need as to how gig employees will be handled in the future. Self employed people had no UI before the ruling and continue to have no UI now. 

AS the story points out it kind of slipped by unnoticed and NOW has major implications not just for Texas but it sets a precedent other states judges and congressional people will use.

Its not just UBER though. The ruling benefits ANY web based business that can utilize gig workers and gives them an unfair advantage over brick and mortar businesses.

The current Pandemic may see some challenges and favorable stays or injunctions put in place.

As a Self Employed individual in my main career I understand the implications as well as the model. I believe however that most people have not understood it and are on the streets trying to earn because they left themselves no option to do otherwise and THEY put everyone at risk.

There is a reason why so many people in the world are trying to make their way to the US.

We have a lot more to lose here than other countries are losing in regards to our economy way of life which could forever be changed without the right measures put in place.

I think the playing field for UBER and LYFT is going to change provided gig workers situations get the attention it deserves.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

JustTreatMeFair said:


> I agree. Here in Texas though they did not "change" anything. What they did was push a group of impressionable people to make a determination ahead of a major need as to how gig employees will be handled in the future. Self employed people had no UI before the ruling and continue to have no UI now.
> 
> AS the story points out it kind of slipped by unnoticed and NOW has major implications not just for Texas but it sets a precedent other states judges and congressional people will use.
> 
> ...


Agreed, this couldn't have come at a worse time for Gig companies.

Now Uber is asking Congress to bail out drivers.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/uber-ceo-seeks-help-workers-142427193.html
This after just having bragged to the world that they have Billions in the bank to outride the CV19 crisis.


----------



## JustTreatMeFair (Nov 28, 2017)

observer said:


> Now Uber is asking Congress to bail out drivers.
> 
> https://finance.yahoo.com/news/uber-ceo-seeks-help-workers-142427193.html
> This after just having bragged to the world that they have Billions in the bank to outride the CV19 crisis.


I would have to say that takes a lot of gall....

Oh wait... They are not OUR responsibility! That's OUR money in the bank to pay OUR salaries and bonuses!...

The solution is rather simple. Allow Unemployment for all the gig workers and send the bill for the employer share to the companies.

This is priceless _"He also called on lawmakers from both parties to pass new laws that would allow independent contractors to be provided with more benefits without classifying them employees."_

His way of saying YOU take care of them and leave our profits alone..


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

JustTreatMeFair said:


> I would have to say that takes a lot of gall....
> 
> Oh wait... They are not OUR responsibility! That's OUR money in the bank to pay OUR salaries and bonuses!...
> 
> ...


I can hardly wait for the blowback.


----------



## FLKeys (Dec 27, 2018)

I'm listening to the Senators talk about it now, it is a big joke, each side blaming the other on not coming to a deal.

They did mention Gig Workers and self employed people.

Sounds like the Democrats want to attach a bunch of items they could not get previously passed to the bill for relief. The Republicans are saying no lets just pass the relief bill that we hashed out over the weekend.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

FLKeys said:


> I'm listening to the Senators talk about it now, it is a big joke, each side blaming the other on not coming to a deal.
> 
> They did mention Gig Workers and self employed people.
> 
> Sounds like the Democrats want to attach a bunch of items they could not get previously passed to the bill for relief. The Republicans are saying no lets just pass the relief bill that we hashed out over the weekend.


I think the Republicans knew Democrats were going to be asking for these items and purposely kept Democrats out of the preliminary negotiations.

Republicans did that to make Democrats look like the bad guys.

When the house did their bill it was Pelosi and Mnuchin that did most of the work. That's why it was passed so quickly.

Democrats want more money to go to workers and controls on how the money is used by businesses that get bailout money.

That's the way I understand things are at the moment.


----------



## JustTreatMeFair (Nov 28, 2017)

Dems are trying to pad it with all kinds of things totally unrelated to the stimulus the country needs.

Money in out pockets is being delayed as DEMS try to get

· Expansive new tax credits for solar and wind energy 
· New emissions standards for airlines and requirement of full offset by 2025 
· Increased collective bargaining and carve outs for Big Labor 
· Required same-day voter registration and early voting 
· A bailout for the U.S. Postal Service, for the union pension fund, and for student loans 
· Retirement plans for community newspaper employees 
· Publication of corporate pay statistics by race and race statistics for all corporate boards 
· A requirement for companies receiving assistance to impose job-destroying $15/minimum wage 
· $1B “Cash For Clunkers”-style program where government buys planes from airlines 
· $1.5M to study climate change mitigation efforts in civil aviation and aerospace industries 
· New burdensome OSHA requirements on hospitals 
· $1B to build on program expanded by President Obama that provides discounted phone service for low-income consumers


----------



## Older Chauffeur (Oct 16, 2014)

Oscar Levant said:


> I"ve yet to fill out a W2 form, have anyone in CA done this?


That would be a W4 form. :whistling:


----------



## FLKeys (Dec 27, 2018)

observer said:


> I think the Republicans knew Democrats were going to be asking for these items and purposely kept Democrats out of the preliminary negotiations.


I was watching the senate discuss it and several republicans said that the deal they came up with was a joint effort between both Republicans and Democrats. Than Nancy Pelosi came up with her version with all the extras and the Democratic leaders ordered the Democrats to not vote for it. I think on the second vote one Democrat stepped over party lines and voted for it. Republicans stated in their discussion that several Democrats were all for it but were told by party leaders not to vote for it. None of the Democrats attended the late session so it was only Republicans arguing their pleas. Sure made the Democrats look bad. I'm sure it is on YouTube if you want to watch it. That is where I was watching it live earlier today.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

FLKeys said:


> I was watching the senate discuss it and several republicans said that the deal they came up with was a joint effort between both Republicans and Democrats. Than Nancy Pelosi came up with her version with all the extras and the Democratic leaders ordered the Democrats to not vote for it. I think on the second vote one Democrat stepped over party lines and voted for it. Republicans stated in their discussion that several Democrats were all for it but were told by party leaders not to vote for it. None of the Democrats attended the late session so it was only Republicans arguing their pleas. Sure made the Democrats look bad. I'm sure it is on YouTube if you want to watch it. That is where I was watching it live earlier today.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...litics/mcconnell-coronavirus-cnntv/index.html


----------



## OldBay (Apr 1, 2019)

JustTreatMeFair said:


> Dems are trying to pad it with all kinds of things totally unrelated to the stimulus the country needs.
> 
> Money in out pockets is being delayed as DEMS try to get
> 
> ...


Wtf. Someone just shoot pelosi. This is despicable.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

McConnell is no better.

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2020/03/20/mcconnell-can-ignore-senate-democrats-but-not-pelosi/


----------



## FLKeys (Dec 27, 2018)

observer said:


> https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...litics/mcconnell-coronavirus-cnntv/index.html


From what they said today the original plan was made without Democrat input however over the weekend it was adjusted after some of the Democrats sat with them and gave input. Several items were changed all relating to the stimulus plan, at that point no extras were added in.

Around the 4:17:00 mark they talk about negotiations between Democrats and Republicans. They also talk about adding provisions for gig workers.


----------



## Ballard_Driver (Jan 10, 2016)

JustTreatMeFair said:


> I would have to say that takes a lot of gall....
> 
> Oh wait... They are not OUR responsibility! That's OUR money in the bank to pay OUR salaries and bonuses!...
> 
> ...


That isn't what I get out of that at all!

At present they're basically not allowed to offer certain stuff WITHOUT OFFERING ALL THE STUFF. So Uber might want to pay for unemployment for people, but can't because that would make people employees, and maybe they don't want to offer full coverage health insurance or paid time off.

A business should be able to negotiate whatever they want with employees. I don't think there should be such a thing as an "employee" vs "contractor." It should all just be what is negotiated in an employment contract. But we have 100+ years of arbitrary laws that make a bunch of legal distinctions that don't make any sense. Sounds to me like he wants to be able to opt into certain perks, like unemployment, without having to take on ALL perks currently mandated as a full time employee. Seems totally reasonable to me.



FLKeys said:


> I was watching the senate discuss it and several republicans said that the deal they came up with was a joint effort between both Republicans and Democrats. Than Nancy Pelosi came up with her version with all the extras and the Democratic leaders ordered the Democrats to not vote for it. I think on the second vote one Democrat stepped over party lines and voted for it. Republicans stated in their discussion that several Democrats were all for it but were told by party leaders not to vote for it. None of the Democrats attended the late session so it was only Republicans arguing their pleas. Sure made the Democrats look bad. I'm sure it is on YouTube if you want to watch it. That is where I was watching it live earlier today.


When I first saw the list of unrelated stuff the Democrats are trying to cram into this it made my blood boil. This is a MAJOR crisis, and to be throwing in completely useless crap like they are is completely uncalled for. I think this is going to blow up in their faces though. It's one thing for them to be arguing about tossing more money directly at people vs bailing out airlines or some such. That's related to the issue and how to deal with it... But a bunch of BS about climate goals, requiring diversity officers, etc etc etc has NOTHING to do with the crisis.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

https://www.businessinsider.com/uber-lyft-drivers-gig-workers-get-unemployment-in-senate-bill-2020-3


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/...-has-made-gig-economys-labor-abuses-untenable


----------

