ab5 illinois

Discussion in 'Trucking Industry Regulations' started by 4noReason, Jan 4, 2020.

  1. 4noReason

    4noReason Road Train Member

    2,143
    554
    Nov 29, 2012
    0
    ok so i hear illinois and nj are watching california very closely on this topic to classify owner op as employees. how long u think until illinois actually follows through on this
     
    D.Tibbitt Thanks this.
  2. D.Tibbitt

    D.Tibbitt Road Train Member

    4,832
    19,267
    Apr 26, 2013
    0
    We will see wat happens jan 13 when the hearing for ab5 is scheduled. I wouldnt be surprised to see nj and illinois follow right behind, they are all communists
     
    Suspect Zero and bzinger Thank this.
  3. x1Heavy

    x1Heavy Road Train Member

    31,517
    36,069
    Mar 5, 2016
    White County, Arkansas
    0
    Would not surprise me at all.

    Im already past simple banning of O/Os and forward thinking towards a day when Gasoline and Desiel engines are outlawed. It would not be welcome.
     
    D.Tibbitt Thanks this.
  4. 4noReason

    4noReason Road Train Member

    2,143
    554
    Nov 29, 2012
    0
    man it ruined my mood yesterday when i heard of it. like idk what my plan B is. going to do my own authority is something i have 0 interest in. and i dont think i know how
     
    D.Tibbitt Thanks this.
  5. wis bang

    wis bang Road Train Member

    1,430
    999
    Jan 12, 2011
    Levittown, PA
    0
    NJ's bills are sitting for now...BUT there is still two more 'lame duck' opportunities...If the are not introduced this legislative session , they start over...with an educated bunch of legiscritters.

    The people affected [not just truckers] raised enough attention that the Demorats were unable to slide it in 'unnoticed'...

    The NJ DOL is already using the ABC test and has filed a $600 million claim against a ride sharing company...

    I still do not understand why they listen to the Teamsters promises of gathering all the 'lost' payroll taxes thinking that the hundreds of port drivers will become 'employees'...no one purchases their own ride and pays all the fees to NJ requires to be an employee....let alone join Freddy Potter's Teamsters...

    No wonder Gov. Murphy is pushing to legalize Pot; they can make a lot of money selling the stuff they MUST be smoking......
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2020
  6. 4noReason

    4noReason Road Train Member

    2,143
    554
    Nov 29, 2012
    0
    so basically they want everyone to be an employee..so will deductions go away?fuel, repair,plates, etc. i just dont get wth they want.
     
  7. wis bang

    wis bang Road Train Member

    1,430
    999
    Jan 12, 2011
    Levittown, PA
    0
    Miss-classification of employees as independents...such as paying a driver percentage on a 1099 to drive YOUR truck...escapes paying unemployment, disability and other state taxes while the politicians are seeking more funds for these and other programs.

    In an effort to get the 'revenue' that they think they are missing; they have changed the methods to determine an independent VRS a contractor making a key point over the contractor doing something the business does not do......a trucking company hiring a independent truck driver fails this part of the test even though the contractor owns his tractor, buys his own fuel, plates, etc. and makes more than a company driver [with a lot of added expenses] by doing his 'own' thing.....

    Same as the weekend wedding musician, paid bloggers, proofreaders, hair dressers who 'rent' their chair and much more. Anyone with a 'side' job would be deemed an employee...

    NJ has already set up the penalties and no business can afford the drastic results should these laws progress.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2020
  8. MrReactor

    MrReactor Light Load Member

    194
    131
    Sep 4, 2006
    Chicago
    0
    I already purchased a house for the price of a VCR in Gary,IN, will have a few drivers forward their mail there, problem solved, everyone get's Indiana CDL.
     
  9. Northeasterner

    Northeasterner Light Load Member

    282
    195
    Apr 1, 2018
    0
    doing your own authority is a PITA, but it's the aim of these kinds of laws. Getting a bank loan is a PITA, but it's the aim of these kinds of laws. The aim being to ensure Owner Ops are truly independent owners and not just misclassified employees.

    Banning Lease Ops *does* make sense. After all, if the carrier you're leased onto can control your fuel card, your ELD, tell you what boards you can haul off of, maybe they even extend a line of credit for your truck or repairs, are they not basically your boss and you their employee?

    Employers want to undercut the job market by hiring fewer employees and more contractors. That's fine. But once those "contracts" start looking more like employment contracts due to the power held over the "non-employee contractor", a lot of us look sideways.
     
    bryan21384, magoo68 and 4noReason Thank this.
  10. wis bang

    wis bang Road Train Member

    1,430
    999
    Jan 12, 2011
    Levittown, PA
    0
    ASSOCIATION OF BI-STATE MOTOR CARRIERS RESPONSE

    TO SUCCESSFUL BLOCKING OF NJ'S

    ANTI-INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR LEGISLATION

    Nearly 11,500 NJ residents signed the Association of Bi-State Motor Carriers petition opposing S4204 & A5936 since November; the bills will now carry over into the next legislative session



    Port Newark, NJ -- The Association of Bi-State Motor Carriers responded to the statement from Senate President Stephen Sweeney confirming that NJ's Anti-Independent Contractor bills (S4204/A5936) will not advance during the final days of the current legislative session. The Bi-State strongly opposed the bills and the speed at which they were fast-tracked through the legislature, citing potential unintended consequences for NJ's independent contractors, including the owner operator truckers who comprise 77% of the driver workforce at the Port of NY & NJ. The Association is a non-profit membership group representing motor carriers who move a majority share of the freight at the Port of NY & NJ.


    "Thousands of NJ residents spoke out and joined us in the fight against these hastily filed bills," said Bi-State President Lisa Yakomin, "and we're grateful that the sponsor has agreed to slow things down and give this complicated issue the time and attention it deserves. We have been advocating to protect the Owner Operator business model for many years, and our voices were finally heard."


    The Association of Bi-State Motor Carriers played an active part in mobilizing opposition to the bills: an online petition garnered nearly 11,500 signatures in less than two months, motor carrier representatives and port drivers testified in Trenton Committee hearings, and Bi-State members participated in numerous Call to Action events, flooding legislators with calls and emails about the detrimental effect the bills would have on the state's economy.


    Independent contractors serve a vital role in the efficient movement of freight at the Port of NY & NJ, the busiest port on the Eastern seaboard and the second-largest port in the U.S. "Truckers at the Port of NY & NJ moved record-breaking freight volumes in 2019," said Yakomin, "and that would not have been possible without the crucial workforce flexibility that the Independent Owner Operator model provides."


    According to current port registry data, 77% percent of the drivers who move freight at the Port of NY & NJ are Independent Owner Operators, and dozens of truckers who attended the hearings in Trenton repeatedly emphasized their desire to remain independent.


    "That's one message that came across loud and clear," said Yakomin. "These drivers are Independent Contractors because they choose to be--they enjoy the autonomy that comes with being an entrepreneur. No one should be forced to become an employee against their will."


    The bills are expected to be reintroduced during the next legislative session, which begins on January 14, 2020, and the Bi-State pledges to continue its vocal advocacy on behalf of its membership.


    "Worker classification is a complex issue that warrants sufficient time and discussion in order to get it right," said Yakomin. "Unfortunately, as we're witnessing right now in California, rushing to enact poorly-written classification laws, without heeding the concerns of those most affected, leads to unintended consequences, expensive lawsuits, and large-scale job loss. S4204 and A5936 would have harmed the very workers they purported to protect. We look forward to collaborating with the NJ Legislature in the months ahead to create new legislation that will achieve the common goal we all seek: protecting workers while establishing clear, objective classification guidelines that more fully accommodate the needs of the modern-day work force."


    ###
     
  • Draft saved Draft deleted