Connect with us

Workers

Target is giving frontline workers $70 million in bonuses — but their growing gig workforce say they just got hit with a major pay cut

Published

on

  • Target just gave 350,000 frontline workers $70 million in bonuses.
  • The company announced the bonus Monday, the same day some of its Shipt gig workforce protested outside Target headquarters in Minneapolis calling for fairer pay.
  • Willy Solis, a lead organizer with the nonprofit Gig Workers Collective, said gig Shoppers were a part of why Target was able to enjoy 273% annual growth in same-day service sales — including curbside pick up, drive up, and Shipt.
  • If you are a Shipt Shopper and would like to share your story, email aakhtar@businessinsider.com.

Target announced Monday that it would offer more than 350,000 frontline employees a $200 bonus each, or $70 million in total.

Target previously gave all hourly full-time and part-time store and distribution center workers $200 bonuses in July. Eligible employees include hourly members in stores and distribution centers, seasonal hires, and hourly team members who “support Target’s guest and team member contact centers.”

Meanwhile, some gig workers for Target-owned delivery service Shipt held a demonstration Monday outside of the company’s headquarters in Minneapolis protesting a new pay model.
Pay for Shipt workers, called Shoppers, is now determined using an algorithm rather than a flat rate, the company confirmed to Business Insider. Shipt classifies Shoppers as independent contractors who are not eligible for employee benefits, including minimum wage or healthcare.

Read more: Leaked Target memo reveals how the retailer is trying to obliterate germs in its stores by wiping down everything from ATMs and handcuffs to Bullseye, the company’s mascot

Some Shoppers have said the algorithmic pay model has lead to lower wages. Molly Snyder, the chief communications officer for Shipt, said Shoppers make $21 per shop including base pay, promo pay, and tips, which did not change on average during the new pay model, but some workers may have seen a decline in pay. Snyder also said there were more Shoppers for Shipt “than ever before” last weekend.

Advertisement


One study, conducted by Coworker.org and an MIT PhD student, found the new pay model resulted in lower pay for 41% of Shoppers, and the number of people earning less is growing.

Willy Solis, a Shipt Shopper and a lead organizer with the grassroots organization Gig Workers Collective, said it felt insulting that Target give bonuses at the same time Shipt Shoppers are calling for fairer pay. Solis said Shoppers were a part of why Target was able to enjoy 273% annual growth in same-day service sales — including curbside pick up, drive up, and Shipt.
“We’re grateful and happy for Target employees to be recognized and for receiving that extra pay, but at the end of the day, we as Shipt shoppers have contributed significantly to make Target a very profitable company,” said Willy Solis, a Shipt Shopper and a lead organizer with the grassroots organization Gig Workers Collective.

Read more: Target just blew the doors off its first quarter earnings. Target CEO Brian Cornell says it was due to these two key factors.

Target bought Shipt in 2017 for $550 million to compete with Amazon and Walmart on same-day delivery. Target is currently valued at $82.5 billion.

If you are a Shipt Shopper and would like to share your story, email aakhtar@businessinsider.com.

Source link

Workers

Don’t Hire Gig Workers to Wait In Line for Your COVID-19 Test

Published

on

By

Over the weekend, a TikTok video went viral advertising a tip to bypass waiting in long lines for COVID-19 testing: hiring a gig worker to wait for you.

A now-deleted TikTok video from user @thetipguyNYC explains that viewers looking to hire someone else to wait for hours among possibly-infected people should use TaskRabbit, a platform for hiring people to do just about anything you don’t want to.  The video advises viewers to “filter by cheapest available” and to instruct the worker to give them a call when they’re at the front of the line. 

In a statement, TaskRabbit said it is aware of the practice of hiring workers to wait in line for COVID-19 tests, and that it’s fine with it. 

“The Wait in Line category has historically been popular during the holidays,” a TaskRabbit spokesperson told Motherboard. “This year, there are some Taskers choosing to wait in line for clients seeking COVID-19 tests.” They also added that “because details of all tasks are shared by clients in advance, Taskers know the types of lines in which they will be waiting, and the decision about whether to accept the task lies with the Tasker.”

One person who did this told Time Out that they couldn’t “fathom how people can disagree—it’s giving people jobs who may have lost theirs during this pandemic, so if they do it and get paid for it, that’s their decision.” They blamed access to testing and “the lack of organization” for the lines, adding that “people should absolutely be taking the opportunity to get paid for it.”

All of that conflicts with what’s actually going on, however. Some of the overcapacity is from a lack of adequately distributed resources, but another part is thanks to the hordes of people who are ignoring CDC guidelines and planning to travel for Thanksgiving

The pandemic has already led to an increase in demand for gig work (for example, food delivery) while exacerbating the divide between those who deliver and those who make the orders from behind phone screens at home. People need money in the middle of a massive employment crisis during a plague, but it doesn’t justify the exploitative work that has popped up in the gap in lieu of a competent and compassionate societal response.

Masses of out-of-work people standing in line for a COVID-19 test on behalf of wealthy people ignoring guidance that could end the pandemic isn’t any kind of solution, it’s a perfect example of why things got this bad to begin with. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Workers

Reconciling the Gig Economy in California: Changes to Worker Classification Laws Since AB 5 | Hanson Bridgett LLP

Published

on

By

Assembly Bill 5, (AB 5), signed by Governor Gavin Newsom in September of 2019, which went into effect on Jan. 1, 2020, codified the California Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles. Dynamex created the presumption that a worker is an employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring business can prove each prong of an ABC test, as follows:

(A) The person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of the work and in fact.

(B) The person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business.

(C) The person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as that involved in the work performed.

Though AB 5 outlined a number of exemptions, the law left many who previously relied on contractor work confused as to how to classify workers that would no longer be presumed independent contractors under the strict ABC test. Dissatisfaction with the new law quickly led to challenges at the Legislature, leading to the passage of AB 2257 and approval of Proposition 22 by voters this year.

AB 2257

AB 2257, drafted by the same author of AB 5, was signed into law by Governor Newsom on Sept.4, 2020. The bill primarily relates to creative work. Under AB 5, certain specified occupations and business relationships were exempted from the application of the ABC test. AB 2257 revised and recast these provisions substantially. The bill additionally specifically exempts certain occupations in creating, marketing, promoting, or distributing sound recordings or musical compositions. The law exempts a musician or musical group for the purpose of a single-engagement live performance event, and an individual performance artist presenting material that is their original work and creative in character, and the result of which depends primarily on the individual’s talent.

AB 2257 narrowed the professional services exemption for services provided by still photographers, photojournalists, freelance writers, editors, and newspaper cartoonists. The bill establishes an exemption for services provided by still photographers, photojournalists, videographers, or photo editors (as defined under law) who work under a written contract that specifies certain terms, subject to prescribed restrictions. The bill also establishes an exemption for services provided to a digital content aggregator (as defined under law) by a still photographer, photojournalist, videographer, or photo editor, and establishes an exemption for services provided by a fine artist, freelance writer, translator, editor, content contributor, advisor, narrator, cartographer, producer, copy editor, illustrator, or newspaper cartoonist who works under a written contract that specifies the terms, subject to prescribed restrictions.

While the majority of the changes established by AB 2257 relate to creative work, the bill also created additional exemptions for certain other narrowly tailored professions and occupations, such as for people who provide underwriting inspections and other services for the insurance industry, manufactured housing salespersons, people engaged by an international exchange visitor program, consulting services, animal services, and competition judges with specialized skills. The bill also creates exceptions for licensed landscape architects, specialized performers teaching master classes, registered professional foresters, real estate appraisers and home inspectors, and feedback aggregators.

The bill revised the conditions under which business service providers providing services pursuant to contract to another business are exempt. The bill also revised the criteria under which referral agencies and service providers providing services to clients through referral agencies are exempt and revised the applicable definitions.

Finally, AB 2257 created an exemption for business-to-business relationships between two or more sole proprietors, and provides that a hiring entity need only satisfy all of the conditions of one of the exemption provisions to qualify for the exemption from the ABC Test.

With respect to enforcement, AB 2257 expanded the possibility of enforcement actions by authorizing any District Attorney to prosecute an action for injunctive relief, in addition to the Attorney General or any City Attorney authorized previously by AB 5.

Proposition 22

On Tuesday, Nov. 3, 2020, California voters overwhelmingly passed Proposition 22. Proposition 22, the most expensive initiative sponsored in California history, backed by Uber, Lyft, and Doordash, codifies the Protect App-Based Drivers and Services Act drafted in response to the restrictions passed under AB 5.

Many companies utilizing contractors have difficulty meeting the B-prong of the ABC test, and thus face significant misclassification risk. This is especially so in the gig economy, where contractors are used to perform work that a hiring entity is in the business of providing to end-customers. AB 5 provides little to no relief for employers within the gig economy, as none of the enumerated exemptions apply.

Proposition 22 is targeted to the gig economy and carves out a specific exemption from AB 5 for “app-based drivers” retained by “network companies.” The Proposition defines “app-based driver” as an individual who is a courier or driver for a company that maintains an online-enabled application or platform used to facilitate delivery services on an on-demand basis or to connect passengers with drivers using a personal vehicle. App-based drivers will be presumed independent contractors so long as a minimum standard is met:

  1. the network company does not unilaterally prescribe specific dates, times of day, or minimum hours during which the app-based driver must be logged into the platform,
  2. the network company does not require the app-based driver to accept any specific rideshare services or delivery service requests as a condition of maintaining access to the platform, and
  3. the network company does not restrict the app-based driver from working in any other lawful occupation or business. These requirements emulate the A-prong of the ABC Test and traditional jurisprudence on independent contractor classification.

Proposition 22 provides a number of legal employment benefits and protections that are required in California for workers classified as employees. For example, app-based drivers now have a guaranteed “net earnings floor” comprised of 120 percent of the applicable minimum wage of the worker’s “engaged time,” guaranteed tips and gratuities, and a guaranteed quarterly healthcare subsidy. For drivers that average 25 hours per week of engaged time during a calendar quarter, the subsidy will equal 82 percent of the average California Covered premium for each month. And for drivers who average between 15 and 25 hours, the subsidy will equal 41 percent of the average California Covered premium. Proposition 22 also requires the applicable companies to provide occupational accident insurance to cover at least $1 million in medical expenses and lost income resulting from injuries suffered while a driver is online, and disability payments of 66 percent of a driver’s average weekly earnings before the injuries suffered. Proposition 22 further requires the applicable company to provide accidental death insurance for the benefit of a driver’s spouse, children, or other dependents when the driver dies while using the app.

In addition to the employment-like pay benefits, Proposition 22 requires network companies to develop anti-discrimination and sexual harassment policies, and develop training programs for drivers related to driving, traffic, accident avoidance, and recognizing sexual assault and misconduct. The ballot measure also criminalizes the impersonation of an app-based driver as a misdemeanor.

Proposition 22 is most likely here to stay. The new law contains a provision which permits the Legislature to amend the law only with a statute passed in each house by seven-eighths of the membership. While a big win for gig economy companies using app-based drivers, Proposition 22’s reach is otherwise very limited. It only applies to companies that maintain an online-enabled application or platform used to facilitate delivery services on an on-demand basis, who also maintain a record of the amount of engaged time and miles accumulated by its couriers, or “transportation network companies” as defined in Public Utilities Code section 5431. i.e., a company operating in California that provides prearranged transportation services for compensation using an online-enabled application or platform to connect passengers with drivers using a personal vehicle. In other words, taxi or courier service companies that utilize an online platform to provide on-demand service are the only ones benefiting from the new law.

In sum, Proposition 22 creates a separate classification for app-based drivers. App-based drivers are thus no longer independent contractors or employees in the traditional sense, but rather a hybrid maintaining the independence traditionally enjoyed by contractors with some of the benefits and protections mandated for employees. The overwhelming support for this new classification in California could see ripple effects across the nation where app-based driving companies operate. Likewise, other industries that utilize an app-based model to provide services by contract workers to end-consumers may see value in developing similar legal exemptions for their gig workforce. Further changes to AB 5 or the expansion of Proposition 22-like legislation for other sectors are therefore expected while the law and the economy reconcile how to deal with the gig economy.

Source link

Continue Reading

Workers

Proposed Temporary Amendment To Facilitate Option-Based Awards To Gig Workers – Corporate/Commercial Law

Published

on

By


United States:

Proposed Temporary Amendment To Facilitate Option-Based Awards To Gig Workers


To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

The Securities and Exchange Commission released for comment
proposed rules that would apply on a temporary basis to allow for
broader reliance on Rule 701 and Form S-8 for stock-based
compensation related awards to gig or platform workers. These
workers may not be employees or consultants eligible to receive
stock-based awards under current Rule 701. The proposed rules would
amend Rule 701 by adding a temporary rule provision that, for five
years, would enable issuers to use Rule 701 to compensate certain
platform workers, subject to specified conditions. An issuer would
be able to use the exemption to issue its securities on a
compensatory basis to platform workers who, pursuant to a written
contract or agreement, provide bona fide services by means of an
internet-based platform or other widespread, technology-based
marketplace platform or system provided by the issuer. Under the
proposed amendments, these offerings would be able to be registered
using Form S-8. The amendments would be available on a temporary
basis in order to allow the SEC to assess whether there are any
unintended consequences. The proposal will be subject to a 60-day
public comment period.

See the SEC press release and fact sheet here, as well as the proposing release here.

Visit us at
mayerbrown.com

Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider
comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the
“Mayer Brown Practices”). The Mayer Brown Practices are:
Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe – Brussels LLP, both limited
liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer Brown
International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in
England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors
Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales number OC
303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS established in France; Mayer Brown
JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated entities in Asia;
and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with
which Mayer Brown is associated. “Mayer Brown” and the
Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in
their respective jurisdictions.

© Copyright 2020. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights
reserved.

This
Mayer Brown
article provides information and comments on legal
issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a
comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not
intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific
legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters
discussed herein.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Corporate/Commercial Law from United States

Can’t Trust This: Consequences Of Bad Contracts

Drew Eckl & Farnham, LLP

Contracts are a part of our daily lives. We sign financing documents to purchase cars and leases to rent apartments. We are handed thick stacks of paper to review…

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2019 Gigger.news.