[gojomo]

People should be able to contract with each other flexibly, without swallowing big cookie-cutter compensation/benefit templates dictated by the state, herding people into 20th-century interest-groups.

If the legislature of the State of California wants some of its citizens to get certain "benefits", it can and should provide them directly, not hold other voluntary activity hostage unless it subsidizes their list-of-goodies.

Uber/Lyft tried other accommodations with their haters, & arguably conformed with the laws as they existed. Then, a clumsy bit of legislation (AB5) from a legislator with an implacably anti-Uber/Lyft agenda outlawed what had been legal, for both Uber/Lyft & a bunch of other freelancer-centric industries, destroying lots of work for Californians.

Those on the warpath against Uber/Lyft have since added exemptions for other industries that they like. The exemptions now include:

* (in AB5) Doctors, dentists, insurance agents, lawyers, accountants, real estate agents, and hairstylists

* (since) Fine artists, Freelance writers, Still photographers, Photojournalists, Freelance editors, Newspaper cartoonists, Translators, Copy Editors, Producers, Cartographers, Musicians with single-engagement live performances, Musicians involved in sound recordings or musical compositions, Insurance inspectors, Real estate appraisers, Manufactured housing salespersons, Youth sports coaches, Landscape architects, Professional foresters

I think drivers deserve the same freedom to flexibly contract as those other dozens of professions. I wish Prop 22 were simpler, but it's better than AB5, so I'm an enthusiastic "Yes".

[ivalm]

It is unfortunate that other professions are not getting protections under AB5, I am all for expanding AB5 to cover basically everyone who

1) doesn’t set their own rate

2) cannot choose to do or not do a job without penalty

3) does not have a market of clients

[EdJiang]

Drivers providing services via Uber can do all three now in California. Drivers can choose a rate multiplier to advertise their services at, decline as many trips as they want, and can directly connect with riders for scheduled rides.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/01/06/ubers-s...

Disclaimer: I work @ Uber but I do not work on driver-related stuff

[pochamago]

But all the exceptions were carved out because the people who would be affected directly by the law hate it so much. Doesn't it seem like a law that draws this much antipathy from the people it's meant to help should be tabled and rethought?