Attempts to classify Leased Operators as Employees continues

You have to be careful and not panick over one article you read...

I have been following this topic of propped labor classification for a long time... The goal is to stop predatory L/P programs... While true O/Os remain free to continue... If you own your truck and can take it to what ever company you want... Then this legislation should not effect you directly.

Its not after the guy that Leases his truck on with a company.... Its after the companies that Lease thier trucks to Drivers...

 

Done. Thanks for the links.

 

Then any legislation should be specific in addressing the predatory LP model - not blanket rules that include non LP owners who contract services to a carrier.

 

The majority of you truckers are wearing masks, so apparently you have no problems being pushed around or forced to do anything. LMFAO.

 

Yeah I agree... And thats is why this keeps dragging on and on... People looking at the situation from the outside in have a hard time wrapping thier head around the difference between L/P, L/O, and O/O. Those of us that understand it keep fighting to make sure they are all diffentiated between... And that is what makes the wording of the legislation hard to get just right... In a legal sence all 3 are very similar... Comments from actual drivers are very important, because we can, and should, help those in power understand the difference so they can come up with the proper wording to only target the desired predatory practices and nit the traditional O/O.

 

I’ve submitted my comments. We need to stick together.

 

Just went down the rabbit hole - I think I’m on board with your take. 261 pages of government documents gets confusing fast.

The AB5 is still blocked for now, and that ABC test would have ended the likes of Landstar’s business model in CA, without an exemption -

- and we’re waiting for the ninth circuit decision relating to classification tests pertaining to the motor carrier sector -

- so it’s still up in the air right now, and as you said, the businesses most terrified of any legislation would probably be LP model ones like Prime, who have already been sued and lost over the issue.

Am I anywhere near to having a better grasp on this @Cattleman84 ?

 

Yes - so long as we stick in the right direction.

I know for a fact Landstar panicked in the last two months of 2019, before the AB5 implementation, and told contractors they would have to move out of California to comply with the rule, or cease contract with LS.

 

Yeah niw you are seeing the broader scope of thus legislation... AB5 is very bad for ALL O/Os.... But this legislation is trying to have a big impact on the L/P practices that have been in the courts alot lately... While not harming the traditional O/O or L/O truckers.

But it is a very fine line to draw and can be very difficult to define legally to accomplish the desired results.

Thise of us that know the difference between L/P, L/O, and O/O need to make sure that our comments on legislation, such as this, emphasizes those differences and makes clear that traditional O/O, and L/O operations are not the problem... It is the predatory L/P practices that are causing so much harm to the industry, and even more so to the individual drivers that fall victim to those practices.