Last year, over 58 percent of California voters approved Proposition 22, an initiative heavily financed by Uber and Lyft that classifies app-based drivers as independent contractors instead of employees.  As Kate Conger reported in the New York Times, the ballot measure campaign “pit labor groups and state lawmakers against ride-hailing and delivery start-ups.”

Earlier this week, the Service Employees International Union and SEIU California asked the Supreme Court to declare Proposition 22 invalid and unenforceable.  The original writ petition in Castellanos v. State of California asserts that the initiative violates the California Constitution by interfering with the Legislature’s unlimited authority over workers’ compensation laws, restricting the courts’ ability to interpret a portion of the Constitution, limiting the Legislature’s authority to pass bills by majority vote, and contravening the single-subject rule.

Proposition 22 carved out exceptions to Assembly Bill 5, legislation enacted to, among other things, codify the Supreme Court’s opinion in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903.  Dynamex limited employers’ ability to classify workers as independent contractors.

Just yesterday, the court ruled that its Dynamex decision is retroactive.

The court has not yet taken any action on the petition, but a request for a preliminary opposition would not be surprising.

Related:

Carolyn Said in the San Francisco Chronicle.

Suhauna Hussain in the Los Angeles Times.

Jessica Mach in the Daily Journal.

Faiz Siddiqui in the Washington Post.