> Our proposal avoids the potential harm of forcing drivers to be employees, whether or not they want to—and the vast majority tell us they don’t want to be.
> Contrary to some of the rhetoric we’ve heard, AB5 does not automatically reclassify any rideshare drivers from independent contractors to employees.
This may seem like an immediate contradiction, but I guess they've reframed it so their proposal is actually in line with AB5?
great pr-speak
> But just because the test is hard does not mean we will not be able to pass it. In fact, several previous rulings have found that drivers’ work is outside the usual course of Uber’s business, which is serving as a technology platform for several different types of digital marketplaces.
Also seems like they will continue to thwart where they can (which I can't blame them for really) but seems aggressive to note. This reads more like a shareholder update, which makes sense.
> Governor Newsom has already committed to sign AB5, which would go into effect in January 2020. Because we continue to believe drivers are properly classified as independent... drivers will not be automatically reclassified as employees, even after January of next year...
> Uber and Lyft together have already transferred $60 million into a campaign committee account, and we are open to investing more to put us in the strongest position possible to run a winning campaign... We are confident that California voters and the millions of riders and drivers who use Uber will step up to protect these important work opportunities.
Translation: "We're betting that we can get a ballot initiative passed legalizing what we do faster than the State of California can bust us for violating AB5."
> Importantly, our ballot measure will not ask voters to exempt us from AB5, even though nearly every other industry in California that works with independent contractors received an exemption from the ABC test through special amendments I mentioned earlier. Instead, we will ask voters to support the pro-driver policies we have advocated for: giving drivers access to benefits and an earnings floor and retaining the flexible access to on-demand work they enjoy today.
It doesn't sound like the proposal is intended avoid compliance with AB5 but to create conditions where new bills that make the ABC test harder pass will have less support.
> Contrary to some of the rhetoric we’ve heard, AB5 does not automatically reclassify any rideshare drivers from independent contractors to employees.
This may seem like an immediate contradiction, but I guess they've reframed it so their proposal is actually in line with AB5?
great pr-speak
> But just because the test is hard does not mean we will not be able to pass it. In fact, several previous rulings have found that drivers’ work is outside the usual course of Uber’s business, which is serving as a technology platform for several different types of digital marketplaces.
Also seems like they will continue to thwart where they can (which I can't blame them for really) but seems aggressive to note. This reads more like a shareholder update, which makes sense.