×
Search

866-540-5505

Se Habla Espanol
Menu
Search

Our Blog

Home/Blog/Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Blocks App Driver Ballot Initiatives

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Blocks App Driver Ballot Initiatives

In a unanimous opinion issued on June 14, 2022, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court found it was an error for the Massachusetts Attorney General to certify two proposed ballot initiatives to redefine the employment classification of rideshare app drivers. The Court determined the initiatives contained at least two substantially distinct policy decisions, and that the lumping together of multiple policy questions does not allow voters to answer a single initiative with a simple “yes” or “no.”

The Massachusetts Attorney General certified Initiative Petitions 21-11 and 21-12 in September 2021. The petitions, which are identical except for the former’s additional section relating to paid driver safety training, would classify rideshare app drivers as independent contractors rather than employees and spell out minimum compensation and benefit standards for drivers. However, both petitions also contain a separate, substantially distinct provision, buried in language at the end, which would narrow the tort of liability for companies like Uber and Lyft for driver misconduct.

The provisions state that for the purposes of third-party lawsuits, rideshare app drivers are independent contractors. While this provision seems consistent with the other language in the petitions, the Court noted a less obvious implication: Accepting the provision places a burden on third parties injured by drivers’ misconduct or negligence to prove that drivers are employees, not independent contractors, in order to hold the parent companies liable.

In January 2022, Plaintiffs challenged these provisions on the grounds that a law defining and regulating the contractual relationship between network companies and app-based drivers violates the state law requirement that ballot initiatives concern only related or mutually dependent subjects. Plaintiffs further alleged the Attorney General’s summaries of the proposed laws did not adequately explain how the petitions would change the existing legal landscape if approved by voters.

The Court agreed with Plaintiffs and found that, because of the measure stipulating that rideshare app drivers are independent contractors for the purpose of third-party lawsuits, the petitions contain at least two substantively distinct policy decisions and thus fail the state law “related subjects” requirement. More specifically, the Court held that designating app drivers as independent contractors for the purpose of Massachusetts wage and hour laws did not also require determining the companies’ potential tort liability.

This ruling does not come as a complete surprise, as the Court hinted during oral argument in May that it is critical of any attempt to mislead voters.

Massachusetts Attorney General and gubernatorial candidate, Maura Healey, whose office defended the ballot measure, stated her respect for the decision to bar the ballot initiatives, but clarified that she plans to continue efforts to force Uber and Lyft to comply with Massachusetts employment law and ensure that rideshare drivers have the same rights as all other employees.

The classification of app drivers is a question that has been hotly contested for years. In fact, Healy has previously brought lawsuits against both Uber and Lyft. And, although the Court struck down the ballot initiatives, Healy’s efforts remain popular with the 80% of rideshare drivers who reported wanting the flexibility of independent contractor status with access to new benefits.

The caption for this action is Koussa et al. v. Attorney General et al., case number SJC-13237, filed in the Supreme Judicial Court for Massachusetts.

The legal team at Miller Shah LLP has extensive experience representing employee misclassification matters as well as other violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and similar state laws. If you have any questions regarding this subject, please contact Samantha Kielbania (sjkielbania@millershah.com) or Chiharu Sekino (cgsekino@millershah.com). The firm can also be reached toll-free at (866) 540-5505.

Share Post:
facebooktwitterLinkedin

Categories

Archives

Contact
Miller Shah LLP

While this website provides general information, it does not constitute legal advice. The best way to get guidance on your specific legal issue is to contact a lawyer. To schedule a meeting with an attorney, please call 866-540-5505 or complete the intake form to email us.
Alec J. Berin - Associate

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Alfonso Vilaboa - Of Counsel

NJ Hoboken |

Anika S. Keuning - Project Analyst

CA San Diego | 866-540-5505

Anna D’Agostino - Associate

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Betsy Ferling-Hitriz - Legal Assistant

CT Chester | 866-540-5505

Bruce D. Parke - Partners

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Caroline Soper - Project Analyst

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Christopher A. Miller - Associate

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Deborah C. England - Of Counsel

CA San Francisco | 866-540-5505

Edward H. Glenn - Of Counsel

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Edward M. Fitzgerald - Staff Attorney

CA Los Angeles | 866-540-5505

Elena M. DiBattista - Legal Assistant

FL Fort Lauderdale | 866-540-5505

Elise M. Wilson - Project Analyst

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Eric L. Young - Of Counsel

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Finn M. Mutrux - Office Staff

CA Los Angeles | 866-540-5505

Gina S. Demetriades - Office Staff

CT Chester | 866-540-5505

Heidi A. Wendel - Of Counsel

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

James C. Shah - Partners

CA Los Angeles | 866-540-5505

James E. Miller - Partners

CT Chester | 866-540-5505

Jayne A. Goldstein - Partners

FL Fort Lauderdale | 866-540-5505

Jillian M. Boyce - Office Staff

CT Chester | 866-540-5505

Jocelyn McNamara - Project Analyst

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Johanna C. Richter - Law Clerk

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

John C. Roberts - Associate

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Jonathan Dilger - Office Staff

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Julie M. Capito - Legal Assistant

CA San Francisco | 866-540-5505

Katie Edwards - Legal Assistant

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Kolin C. Tang - Partners

CA San Diego | 866-540-5505

Laurie Rubinow - Partners

CT Chester | 866-540-5505

Madison Gregg - Associate

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Marialisa Samo - Legal Assistant

CA San Diego | 866-540-5505

Mark Xiao - Associate

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Natalie Finkelman Bennett - Partners

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Nathan C. Zipperian - Partners

FL Fort Lauderdale | 866-540-5505

Nicholas Day - Of Counsel

NJ Hoboken | 866-540-5505

Nicholas K. Ono - Project Analyst

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Raffaele Scalcione - Of Counsel

IT Milan | 866-540-5505

Reilly K. Powers - Project Analyst

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Robert W. Biela - Staff Attorney

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Ronald S. Kravitz - Of Counsel

CA San Francisco | 866-540-5505

Rrita Osmani - Project Analyst

CT Chester | 866-540-5505

Shuping Li - Project Analyst

NY New York City | 866-540-5505

Stephen T. Rutkowski - Law Clerk

CT Chester | 866-540-5505

Sue Moss - Legal Assistant

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505

Sydney D. Finlay - Associate

CA San Diego | 866-540-5505

Tina Moukoulis - Staff Attorney

PA Philadelphia | 866-540-5505