Since Prop 22 is blowing up my twitter right now, a thread from a gig worker on why Prop 22 is bad (1/N)

First, let's understand the current law that Uber/Lyft/DoorDash etc are violating. Under AB5, gig workers are already eligible to be employees w/ *existing flexibility* bc the way it works, the gig companies still have too much control on how we do our jobs (like pay, etc) 2/N

So yes, under the law gig workers should be free to have flexibility & be employed. W2 Employment ≠ hard scheduling. And benefits of employment aren't just health care, but also accrued pto, UI (hello pandemic!), and collective bargaining power 3/N

Secondly, gig companies promise a lot of seemingly good things in Prop 22 but guess what, if they just did most of those things & reclassified changing little else *they'd be compliant with AB5 already.* 4/N

So why are they spending $180+ million on Prop 22? This is a matter of opinion but it wouldn't be too hard to believe that these companies want to avoid paying more taxes and avoid making it easier for gig workers to organize 5/N

All the while using gig worker desires for flexibility as a shield and spreading misinformation that W2 employment = part time inflexible scheduled job when AB5 says otherwise 6/N

Not to say there aren't flaws to AB5 (there are!) but the other kicker to Prop 22 is the 7/8 requirement to change ANY of it in the future 7/N

Even if you'd still rather be or want gig workers as a 1099 contractor, why let gig companies set the terms *permanently* under Prop 22 rather than fix the changes with AB5 now? 8/N

So TL;DR Prop 22 is bad for workers. We can fix things with AB5 and there are 180+ million reasons why we should trust workers then gig companies protecting their own profits 9/9

Bonus image

cc: @sashaperigo @uhshanti @chrisarvinsf @IKEAtkinson & others who might want this info