California Court of Appeals Rules that Proposition 22 is Constitutional…Mostly…For Now
California Court of Appeals Rules that Proposition 22 is Constitutional…Mostly…For Now

In the 2020 general election, Californians passed Proposition 22, which gave ride-sharing and delivery app companies such as Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash the ability to continue classify their drivers as independent contractors.  Shortly after the proposition passed, a group of drivers challenged its constitutionality.  At its core, the issue is whether drivers in the gig economy should be entitled to the benefits typically afforded to employees.  As independent contractors, these workers forgo such benefits in exchange for the right to set their own work schedule and receive increased tax benefits.

In 2021, a trial court ruled in favor of the drivers and held that the proposition was unconstitutional because it: (1) intruded on the California Legislature’s exclusive authority to create worker’s compensation laws; (2) unduly limited the Legislature’s authority to enact legislation that would not constitute an amendment to the proposition; and (3) violated the single-subject rule for initiative statutes.  In short, by invalidating Proposition 22, the trial court determined that these drivers should be classified as employees. 

Naturally, an appeal followed.  On March 13, 2023, the Court of Appeal disagreed with the trial court and determined that Proposition 22 was mostly constitutional.  In the 132-page opinion, the appellate court reversed most of the trial court’s ruling, thereby reinstating the ride-sharing and delivery app companies right to determine whether their drivers are employees or independent contractors.  The one section of the proposition that remains unconstitutional is Section 7465, subsections (c)(3) and (4), because these provisions unduly limited the powers afforded to the Legislature to enact amendments to the legislation; specifically the authority to authorize collective bargaining over driver’s compensation, benefits, or working conditions – an issue that was not expressly contemplated by the proposition when passed.

Given the vested interests and potential money at stake on both sides of the issue, it is highly likely that the drivers and labor unions (led by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU)) will seek a determination from the California Supreme Court to settle the issue.  While companies such as Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash have won the day, their next challenge, prevailing before a high court which has largely favored employees over employers, will be a much more difficult task. 

Subscribe

Recent Posts

Blogs

Contributors

Archives

Jump to PageX

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP Cookie Preference Center

Your Privacy

When you visit our website, we use cookies on your browser to collect information. The information collected might relate to you, your preferences, or your device, and is mostly used to make the site work as you expect it to and to provide a more personalized web experience. For more information about how we use Cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Always Active

Necessary cookies enable core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility. These cookies may only be disabled by changing your browser settings, but this may affect how the website functions.

Functional Cookies

Always Active

Some functions of the site require remembering user choices, for example your cookie preference, or keyword search highlighting. These do not store any personal information.

Form Submissions

Always Active

When submitting your data, for example on a contact form or event registration, a cookie might be used to monitor the state of your submission across pages.

Performance Cookies

Performance cookies help us improve our website by collecting and reporting information on its usage. We access and process information from these cookies at an aggregate level.

Powered by Firmseek