California Uber, Lyft Drivers File Lawsuit Over Prop 22

Gig workers in California who drive for Uber, Lyft and other rideshare and delivery platforms have filed a lawsuit in the state’s Supreme Court seeking to overturn Proposition 22, the Associated Press reported on Wednesday (Jan. 13).

The California ballot initiative Prop 22 was upheld on Election Day in November, with 58 percent of voters supporting the measure that defines gig workers as independent contractors. The lawsuit claims that the new mandate is unconstitutional because it limits the government’s ability to empower workers to form unions. It also prevents drivers from getting workers’ compensation.

The ballot measure was promoted and supported by a $200 million campaign funded by Uber, Lyft and similar platforms. Labor unions burned through some $20 million to fight the measure, and have now joined the new lawsuit filed by drivers.

Before Prop 22, California lawmakers were pushing for gig workers to be classified as company employees, which would make them eligible for health insurance and other benefits and provide protection against job loss.

“Prop. 22 doesn’t just fail our state rideshare drivers; it fails the basic test of following our state constitution,” Bob Schoonover of the Service Employees International Union told the AP. “The law as written by Uber and Lyft denies drivers rights under the law in California and makes it nearly impossible for lawmakers to fix these problems.”

Mary-Beth Moylan, associate dean of McGeorge Law School in Sacramento, told the AP that the drivers’ lawsuit makes good points, but that there will be obstacles to get around, such as having the case heard in California Supreme Court instead of the lower courts. That would require strong legal arguments and a sense of urgency, she noted.

The other obstacle is the November vote, which supported the measure. Courts usually tend to defer to the voters.

“Generally speaking, courts in California don’t like to overturn the will of the people,” Moylan said. “But the petitioners’ claim is that the people did not really have the power to do what they did. There are instances where the California courts have come in and said … it’s nice that this is what the people wanted to do, but our constitution doesn’t permit the people to do this.”

Before the measure passed, Uber and Lyft said they could be forced to leave California because the cost of compliance would be so high.