SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
independent contractors
Trump’s Labor Department Tries to Redefine Workers Out of Their Rights
A proposed rule would make it easier to classify employees as contractors—and harder to claim minimum wage and overtime protections.
Mar 03, 2026
Last week, Trump’s Labor Department proposed a rule aimed at making it easier for businesses to call workers “independent contractors” instead of employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act. It’s the latest round in a regulatory back-and-forth. The legal details get dense fast. But the real-world implications are straightforward: millions of workers are at risk of losing foundational minimum wage and overtime protections, exacerbating their financial precarity.
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) provides employees with minimum wage and overtime protections. When Congress passed the FLSA, it sought to cover the broadest concept of employees possible, including those who were performing piece rate garment work out of their kitchens - something that today might look like gig work.
Since the 1940s, courts across the country and in vastly different employment contexts have consistently held that someone is an employee if they are economically dependent on the employer for work. Despite this broad protection in the law, too many employers today misclassify workers as independent contractors—including dishwashers at restaurants, auto mechanic technicians, and even nurses—in order to sidestep legal obligations and lower labor costs. These misclassified workers don’t just lose out on minimum wage and overtime protections. They are often misclassified under other employment laws too, leaving them saddled with higher payroll tax burdens, all while not having the protections of Unemployment Insurance if they are let go, Workers’ Compensation if they are injured on the job, or other typical benefits associated with employment.
Trump’s latest proposed rule would give employers cover to misclassify more workers as independent contractors. Specifically, it tosses aside a decades-long test that the Wage and Hour Division uses when determining a worker’s economic dependence, and instead advances a slimmed down version of the test that will enable businesses to more easily skirt their responsibilities under the FLSA. The Department believes that the long-standing test as articulated in the Biden 2024 Final Rule leads to “unnecessary classification of….workers as employees” and makes the independent contractor classification “more difficult.”
In short, the Department thinks the current test is too complicated, and employers are erring too often on the side of classifying workers as employees. The Department further claims that a slimmed-down test of classification would be a better fit for the modern economy. But at a time when businesses’ relationships with workers is getting more complicated, the test for determining classification shouldn’t be narrowed; it should remain probative. At a moment when we need a high-powered microscope to understand the complex layers of business models and management practices, the Department of Labor is seemingly saying a simple magnifying glass will do just fine. This approach will only exacerbate trends already underway in industries and occupations that have traditionally provided stable, middle-class jobs. Take, for example, nursing.
You might assume that someone working as a nurse in a hospital or nursing home is surely an employee of those entities. Not so anymore. Already, hospitals are relying on staffing agencies to fill nursing positions, and these agencies, in some cases, are misclassifying nurses as independent contractors. Research from the Roosevelt Institute has also highlighted how new app-based companies are using Uber-like platforms to hire, place, and manage nurses, all while claiming they are independent contractors. On these platforms, workers must compete for shifts and bid on pay, sometimes not knowing until the morning of whether they got a shift. These gig platforms have created a race to the bottom in wages and job quality, leaving some nurses without their own health insurance and relying on second jobs to make ends meet. Under Trump’s proposed rule, it will be far harder for workers under these models of management to realize their rights under the Fair Labor Standards Act. And it will only encourage other businesses to follow suit.
To be sure, there are many legitimate independent contractors who are in business for themselves. These small businesses are important parts of our economy. But a dishwasher in the back of a restaurant isn’t in business for herself. An auto technician who shows up to the same shop day in and day out likely isn’t in business for himself. And surely a nurse caring for patients in a hospital isn’t in business for themselves.
The Trump Administration pulled out a sledgehammer on a cornerstone of the New Deal. Trump’s DOL and others who are proponents of making it easier to classify workers as independent contractors often claim this provides workers with greater flexibility in their life. But flexibility doesn’t mean better outcomes. Weakening the FLSA doesn’t result in a better life for more workers.
In fact, recent research on job quality experienced by workers shows stark differences in outcomes between independent contractors and employees across some key metrics. Independent contractors, for example, are more likely to report receiving less than 24 hours notice of when they need to work. At the same time, they are no more likely than W-2 employees to say they have input on when they can take a few hours off for personal reasons. Yet, independent contractors remain more likely to report wanting to work more hours and receive more money.
Last week’s proposed rule sadly isn’t a surprise but it is a stark reminder of how little this Administration cares about using the tools of government to enforce laws and advance policies that enable workers to secure a better life.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump's Revived Anti-Worker Rules Condemned as 'Outright Grift'
"Every day, little by little, the Trump administration is rigging the system to benefit giant corporations and shortchange workers," said one senator.
Feb 26, 2026
President Donald Trump's "barrage of attacks on workers" continued on Thursday with announcements about two key labor rules.
The US Department of Labor (DOL) proposed an independent contractor rule that the National Employment Law Project (NELP) called "yet another example of the administration siding with major corporations and stacking the deck against working people" by "effectively allowing employers to strip workers of federal minimum wage and overtime protections."
The DOL's Wage and Hour Division proposal would replace the Biden administration's widely celebrated 2024 policy for when employers can treat workers as independent contractors under the Fair Labor Standards Act with business-friendly guidance that resembles a rule adopted just before the end of Trump's first term.
"This rule will have profound real-world consequences for working people," warned NELP. "Misclassification is common in many labor-intensive, poorly paid jobs—jobs like home healthcare, janitorial work, landscaping, personal services, and increasingly, app-dispatched ride-hail and delivery—where people of color and immigrants are overrepresented, and workers lack the bargaining power to negotiate higher wages and better working conditions."
NELP pointed to research showing that low-paid independent contractors "lag behind their employee counterparts," and some "do not even earn the federal minimum wage." The organization stressed that "this rule threatens to enshrine a two-tiered labor system where similarly situated workers receive vastly different rights and protections based on the classification chosen by the business employing them."
The new rule—which now faces a 60-day public comment period—focuses on two "core factors" to determine an employee's classification: the nature and degree of control over the work, and the worker's opportunity for profit or loss based on initiative or investment.
NELP argued that "by elevating two factors above other equally important factors, the Trump administration's test fails to account for the economic realities of many working relationships. Many workers labeled as independent contractors are not really in business for themselves because they are integrated into the operations of a larger business structure that sets most of the terms of the work."
"In app-dispatched ride-hail and delivery jobs, for example, corporations like Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, and Amazon use apps and algorithms to offer shifts or assignments to so-called independent contractors doing the core work of the business, set the wages these workers receive, surveil and assess their performance, and determine if they are offered future assignments or get 'deactivated,'" the group noted. "App-based ride-hail and delivery workers perform difficult and dangerous work without basic employment protections like the right to minimum wage and overtime, workers' compensation, and unemployment insurance."
As NELP and other critics sounded the alarm over the DOL proposal on Thursday, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) also revived an effort from Trump's first term, reinstating that administration's 2020 rule on joint employers.
During Trump's initial administration, the NLRB required joint employers to "possess and exercise substantial direct and immediate control" over at least one aspect of the workers' employment. In 2023, under former President Joe Biden, the board decided that two or more entities could be considered joint employers if they had an employment relationship with the workers and helped to determine their terms and conditions of employment. However, the latter was blocked by a Trump-appointed judge the next year.
Unlike the DOL proposal, the board's rule is final. The NLRB—which has two Trump appointees, one Biden appointee, and two vacancies—said in the Federal Register that "the 2023 rule was vacated by the district court, and the action the board takes today merely implements the court's decision. Our action is ministerial and therefore will have no separate economic effect."
US Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), a senior member and former chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, declared in a Thursday statement that "every day, little by little, the Trump administration is rigging the system to benefit giant corporations and shortchange workers—it's an outright grift and working people should be furious."
"The joint employer rule is nothing more than a return to Trump's anti-worker policies that let giant corporations skirt their basic obligations to employees—Trump is giving the biggest corporations cover to deny workers their ability to band together for better wages and working conditions and leaving millions of workers in the lurch, vulnerable to egregious violations of their rights," she said.
"At the same time, today, the Trump administration announced they're working to rescind the independent contractor rule," Murray continued. "Trump wants to let giant corporations classify workers as contractors so that they don't have to pay them minimum wage and overtime—these workers deserve fair pay."
The senator then took aim at the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act that congressional Republicans passed and the president signed last summer, saying that "under the Trump administration, giant corporations get giant tax breaks paid for by cutting Medicaid—the healthcare that the poorest workers are forced to rely on."
"Now, Trump wants those same corporations off the hook for every benefit, protection, and dollar they'd otherwise owe to millions of workers—it's a shakedown," she asserted. "Republicans are proving time and again, they don't care about workers—they don't want to even let workers have crumbs, but billionaires can get trillions in tax breaks that will blow up our national debt."
Murray isn't up for reelection in November's closely watched midterms, but could lead the Senate Appropriations Committee if Democrats reclaim the chamber. On Thursday, she vowed that "I am going to keep fighting for laws on the books that protect workers and build an economy that grows the middle-class, not just profit margins for the largest corporations on Earth."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Teamsters Rally in NYC After Amazon's 'Illegal' Firing of 150 Unionized Drivers
"Amazon would be nothing without its workers," said one worker. "We're the ones who power their profits. We're the ones who put our health and safety on the line every single day."
Sep 09, 2025
Teamsters and their supporters rallied outside a New York Amazon facility Monday in protest of what they said was an "illegal" firing of over 150 unionized drivers.
According to the union, the fired workers were employed by the delivery service provider Cornucopia, one of thousands of providers the company contracts with to deliver packages. These workers joined the Teamsters last year as the union went on strike in nine cities across the US.
Amazon claims these workers are not employees, but "contractors," and that firing them does not constitute illegal union busting.
The union, however, described this as "a phony shell game," saying that the contractors "wear Amazon uniforms, follow Amazon rules, and work off Amazon's routing software."
"Amazon calls the shots," read a statement from the union. "They are the employer and everyone knows it."
Last year, a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) official in Los Angeles agreed that the company had engaged in unfair labor practices when it fired other unionized contractors in California, and determined that they did, in fact, count as employees of Amazon.
At the time, this ruling seemed to provide some clarity as Amazon workers fought to have their union recognized by the company, which has refused to recognize them for years.
This remained the case even after 2024, when more than 10,000 Amazon workers joined the Teamsters and the union launched the largest strike ever against the company right before the holidays, during which they demanded the company negotiate a fair contract that included wage increases and addressed workplace safety issues and illegal union busting.
Outside Amazon's DBK4 facility, which joined the strike last year, the Teamsters and their allies renewed calls for negotiation Monday.
"Amazon is breaking the law and we let the public know it," said Antonio Rosario, a Local 804 member and Teamster organizer.
Latrice Shadae Johnson, a Teamster who works at DBK4, added that "Amazon would be nothing without its workers."
"We're the ones who power their profits. We're the ones who put our health and safety on the line every single day. We're the ones who made them a $2 trillion corporation," said Johnson. "If Amazon thinks we're going to take this lying down, they have another thing coming. Our solidarity is only growing stronger."
That solidarity has come from many corners across New York City, with members of the City Central Labor Council, part of the AFL-CIO, taking part in the rally.
The Teamsters were also joined by democratic socialist state Sen. Kristen Gonzalez (D-59), who defeated the industry-backed cousin of former Queens US Rep. Joe Crowley in 2022.
"I've been in office three years, and every single year I've been right here in this spot because every single year Amazon has done union-busting," Gonzalez said to cheers from the crowd, "It's because they think they are above the law."
In 2024, Amazon joined a lawsuit filed by Elon Musk's company SpaceX, arguing that the NLRB, which is responsible for adjudicating labor rights violations, is unconstitutional because its members cannot be fired at will by the US President.
Just one week into his term, President Donald Trump fired NLRB member Gwynne Wilcox, effectively crippling the board's ability to rule on union-busting cases.
According to LaborLab, which publishes reports on corporate union busting, "Without a functioning board, companies like Amazon and Tesla can engage in union-busting tactics with impunity, facing no legal consequences for violating workers' rights."
The progressive state assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, currently the frontrunner to be New York City's next mayor, brought national attention to the Teamsters' plight on Monday.
"One of the most powerful corporations in the history of the world is firing unionized drivers in Queens," Mamdani wrote on X. "Solidarity with the Teamsters who rallied today against these unjust layoffs and to demand good faith negotiations."
Several Democratic members of the House of Representatives from New York, including Jerry Nadler and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, issued their own statements of solidarity, as did Republican Mike Lawler.
"Any company that denies workers the right to choose [collective] bargaining rights, including Amazon, should be confronted," Lawler said. "Unions are the backbone of this country. They helped build this country. And they damn well will ensure we have a strong and secure country moving forward."
Nadler added that he stood "with Amazon Teamsters as they rally in Queens today to hold Amazon accountable for its unlawful anti-union activity."
"Amazon," he said, "stop union busting and start bargaining a fair contract now!"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Workers Built the Platform Economy, But They’re Not Seeing Its Rewards
By classifying workers as contractors, platform companies avoid paying core employment obligations while retaining tight control over how the work is done.
May 29, 2025
Alejandro G. thought that driving full-time for Uber in Houston offered freedom—flexible hours, quick cash, and time to care for his young son. But that promise faded fast.
“There are hours when I make $20,” he told me. “And there are hours when I make $2.” As his pay dropped, he pawned his computer and camera, began rationing the insulin he takes to manage his diabetes—putting his health at risk—and started driving seven days a week, often late into the night, just to break even.
Alejandro, whose real name is withheld for his privacy, is one of millions of workers powering a billion-dollar labor model built on legal loopholes. Companies like Uber insist they are tech platforms, not employers, and that their workers are independent contractors. This sleight of hand allows them to sidestep minimum wage laws, paid sick leave, and other workplace protections, while shifting the financial risks and responsibilities of employment onto the workers. It also lets them avoid employer taxes, draining funds from public coffers.
If gig workers were properly classified, public companies would have to disclose pay data, showing just how far below the median these workers earn, and how high executive compensation soars above them.
A new Human Rights Watch report looks at seven major platform companies operating in the U.S.—Amazon Flex, DoorDash, Favor, Instacart, Lyft, Shipt, and Uber—and finds that their labor model violates international human rights standards. These companies promise flexibility and opportunity, but the reality for many workers is far more precarious. In a survey of 127 platform workers in Texas, we found that after subtracting expenses and benefits, the median hourly pay was just $5.12, including tips. This is nearly 30% below the federal minimum wage, and about 70% below a living wage in Texas.
Seventy-five percent of workers we surveyed said they had struggled to pay for housing in the past year. Thirty-five percent said they couldn’t cover a $400 emergency expense. Over a third had been in a work-related car accident. Many said they sold possessions, relied on food stamps, or borrowed from family and friends to get by. Their labor keeps the system running—but the system isn’t built to work for them.
By classifying workers as contractors, platform companies avoid paying core employment obligations while retaining tight control over how the work is done. The platforms often use algorithms and automated systems to assign jobs, set pay rates, monitor performance, and deactivate workers without warning. In our survey, 65 workers said they feared being cut off from a platform, and 40 had already experienced it. Nearly half were later cleared of wrongdoing.
Companies use incentives that feel like rewards but function more like traps. Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash dangle “quests,” “challenges,” and “surges” to push workers to stay on a shift for longer or hit quotas. These schemes lure workers into chasing bonuses that rarely reflect the true cost of the work. One Uber driver in Houston said, “They are like puppet masters. They psychologically manipulate you.”
Access to higher-paying gigs is also conditioned on behavior. Platforms use customer ratings and performance scores to shape who gets the best jobs. One Shipt worker in Michigan said her pay plummeted immediately after she received two four-star reviews, down from her usual five. Ratings are hard to challenge, and recovering from a low score can take weeks. Workers feel forced to accept every job and appease every customer, reinforcing a system that rewards compliance over fairness.
These aren’t the conditions of self-employment. They’re the conditions of control.
This labor model also drains public resources. In Texas alone, Human Rights Watch estimates that misclassification of platform workers in ride share, food delivery, and in-home services cost the state over $111 million in unemployment insurance contributions between 2020 and 2022. These are public funds that could have strengthened social protection or public services. Instead, they’re absorbed into corporate profits—a quiet transfer of public wealth into private hands.
In 2024, Uber reported $43.9 billion in revenue and nearly $10 billion in net income, calling the fourth quarter its “strongest ever.” DoorDash pulled in $10.72 billion, up 24% from the previous year. Combined, their market valuation exceeds $250 billion.
But workers are pushing back, and policymakers are starting to listen. From June 2 to 13, the 113th session of the International Labour Conference—the United Nations-backed forum where global labor standards are negotiated—will convene to debate a binding treaty on decent work in the platform economy. The message is clear: Workers are demanding rules that protect their rights.
The U.S. can start by updating employment classification standards and adopting clear criteria to determine whether a platform worker is truly independent. We also need greater transparency. If gig workers were properly classified, public companies would have to disclose pay data, showing just how far below the median these workers earn, and how high executive compensation soars above them.
This isn’t about rejecting technology. It’s about making sure new forms of work don’t replicate old forms of exploitation or create new ones, by hiding them behind an app.
Alejandro doesn’t need an algorithm to tell him when to work harder. He has a right to a wage he can live on, protections he can count on, and a system that doesn’t punish him for getting sick, injured, or speaking up.
He and millions like him built the platform economy. It’s time they shared more than the burden.
Keep ReadingShow Less
The Gig Economy Is a Working-Class Nightmare
As the “gig” model has taken hold, many traditional, stable jobs have been put in jeopardy, and many of the hard-fought rights associated with them are being dismantled or watered down.
Aug 05, 2024
In his 1930 essay “ Economic Possibilities for Our Grandchildren”, the economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that future generations would someday work 15 hours a week. The theory was based on anticipated advances in technology and productivity. Keynes’ theory has a strange kind of prescience today (though not quite in the way he expected). What’s called the “gig economy”—a labor market that relies heavily on part-time, temporary, or freelance work—resembles his prediction in a backward sort of way, as numerous industries and occupations have moved away from fixed, stable employment toward short-term flexibility.
Conclusive data on the current size of the independent contractor workforce in the U.S. is difficult to find. Different sources disagree on the scale. In 2017, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, about 6.9% of workers in America were classified as independent contractors (lower than in 2005). However, the Covid-19 pandemic increased demand for delivery services and rideshare apps (Uber, Doordash, Instacart). A study published last year by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that independent contractors may be around 15% of all workers.
Gig workers are not a particularly large slice of our labor force, but they represent a microcosm of a larger trend—the effects of post-Fordism (post-industrialism). In the 1970s, America transitioned away from the Fordist model of labor, where people worked on assembly lines in the mass production of goods. As this was happening, wages began to stagnate, union membership declined, and the U.S. lost its domestic manufacturing base. The New Deal coalition was dissolved, and the working class became less and less associated with the Democratic Party.
Keeping people stuck in low-wage, part-time jobs in the service sector without security or benefits is a poor substitute for fair compensation, and companies cannot rely on it forever.
A major change has taken place in the economic organization of our society. As social safety nets and union membership have been eroded, job precarity has become a permanent state for many Americans. In the gig economy, your position and status are constantly in flux. Maybe you do your job online in a hybrid or work-from-home format. Maybe you move around between periods of unemployment and temporary or part-time employment. Under the Fordist model, a person could expect to work at the same place for their entire lives with rising standards of living. The gig economy, by contrast, is a fractured labor market where work is increasingly isolated, casualized, and digitized, and limited compensation and benefits are the norm. Gig work is particularly common among younger generations. Nearly 45% of millennial professionals do freelance work (many in addition to other jobs).
In 1997, Alan Greenspan, the then-Chairman of the Federal Reserve, testified before Congress, and he attributed the success of the economy to growing “worker insecurity.” Essentially, workers were too worried about keeping their jobs to ask for higher wages or benefits. They no longer had the same kind of job security, which meant they were in a weaker bargaining position. If you’re an employer, this kind of relationship is ideal. You keep labor costs low, and profits high.
Nowhere is this basic lack of fairness more evident than in gig positions. If you’re classified as an independent contractor, there are a whole host of legal rights that don’t apply to you. It varies by state, but in Massachusetts, for example, you don’t have a right to a minimum wage, overtime, or sick pay. You’re not eligible for unemployment benefits. You’ll almost certainly have a harder time finding health, dental, or vision insurance. Benefits such as retirement, worker’s compensation, and family leave are also generally not offered. You most likely won’t get paid time off for public holidays. Anti-discrimination laws don’t protect you, and you can’t legally sue your employer for wrongful termination (although there are exceptions if the employer has violated a written contract). Independent contractor status also severely limits the possibilities of labor organizing.
There are some benefits to independent contract work (it’s easier to set your own hours, work remotely), but in an ideal labor market, people would have a choice between flexibility and stability. They wouldn’t be forced into either category. For many people, this doesn’t seem to be the case.
In 2020, rideshare drivers in California fought a bitter fight to avoid being classified as independent contractors. The state had previously passed Assembly Bill 5, which required rideshare drivers to be classified as employees. Uber, Lyft, and other companies drafted and campaigned for Prop. 22 to exclude drivers from being classified as employees and spent more than $200 million supporting the measure, according to OpenSecrets. The U.S. Department of Labor and the National Labor Relations Board also supported the bill. In 2020, the measure passed.
As gig positions become more and more common, we can expect to see similar fights in other industries, with similar results. Companies can essentially rewrite labor laws in their favor, and poor and working people bear the brunt of this.
Alternatives to Uber have also suffered. A significant share of the market has been taken away from traditional cab companies. New York City’s taxi medallion system, for instance, has faced a collapse. The medallions (which are required to operate a yellow cab) once sold for up to $1 million, but have plummeted in value, now going for as little as $90,000. Many cab drivers have worked for years to earn these medallions, planning to lease them to new drivers to finance their retirement. These people have essentially had their savings wiped out.
In 2018, New York drivers experienced a string of suicides related to the increased difficulties of earning a living in these positions. In February, 2018, a livery driver named Doug Schifter committed suicide in front of City Hall. He had previously been the writer of a column in a trade publication about how app-based services were flooding his market. Later that year, a cab driver named Nicanor Ochisor hanged himself in his garage. His family publicly stated that ridesharing companies like Uber and Lyft had made it impossible for him to earn a living.
In other industries, such as academia, gig workers are being similarly squeezed. Adjunct or contract-renewable professors may make less than half what tenured professors make, and often have to string together work across multiple universities, sometimes supported with tutoring, test proctoring, and other side jobs. According to survey data released in 2022 by the American Federation of Teachers, “a quarter of adjunct faculty have an annual salary below the federal poverty line.” These professors often have limited or no benefits, and no guarantee of work past the current semester.
These are just a few examples. As the “gig” model has taken hold, many traditional, stable jobs have been put in jeopardy, and many of the hard-fought rights associated with them are being dismantled or watered down. We’ve entered the age of casualized work, but for the opposite reason Keynes predicted—not because we’re basking in leisure, but because we’re trapped in a state of precarity. Productivity has increased, but these gains have not been evenly distributed.
Aside from being unfair, this model is also unsustainable. Keeping people stuck in low-wage, part-time jobs in the service sector without security or benefits is a poor substitute for fair compensation, and companies cannot rely on it forever. The essential hollowness of this model is in plain view, and the subordination of workers to these demands will, sooner or later, collapse. It’s impossible to predict when exactly this will happen, or on what scale, but it can be predicted that it will happen eventually.
How can this be overcome? A sharp reversal of course is needed. Working conditions are unlikely to improve unless we can rebuild the popular institutions which guarantee our rights. Labor unions in particular can establish paths to long-term job security and multi-year contracts as industry standards. Additionally, peer countries have addressed the shortcomings of gig work by offering things like paid family leave, sick leave and universal healthcare to the population. The U.S. needs to encourage broad, expansive change to address these growing concerns, and re-write the terms of our social contract to create routes to economic security. If there is to be any kind of positive development in this area of the labor market, it will depend on these efforts.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Biden DOL Finalizes Independent Contractor Rule to 'Help Protect Workers'
Praising the policy, one economist said that employer misclassification "robs workers of labor rights and threatens their economic security."
Jan 09, 2024
Democrats in Congress and unions were among those applauding on Tuesday as the U.S. Department of Labor announced its final rule to provide guidance on when employers can treat workers as independent contractors under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
"Misclassifying employees as independent contractors is a serious issue that deprives workers of basic rights and protections," acting Labor Secretary Julie Su said in a statement. "This rule will help protect workers, especially those facing the greatest risk of exploitation, by making sure they are classified properly and that they receive the wages they've earned."
Welcoming the rule—set to take effect in March—the Teamsters said on social media that "it's long past time for American employers to recognize and respect their employees, to stop exploiting loopholes to pay workers less and deprive them of benefits, and to honor every worker's right to organize and collectively bargain a union contract."
Economic Policy Institute (EPI) president Heidi Shierholz highlighted that the rule rescinds a Trump-era
policy and, like Su, stressed how "employer misclassification of workers as independent contractors robs workers of labor rights and threatens their economic security."
"Many workers are harmed by employer misclassification—particularly those in the lowest-wage and most difficult jobs, such as nail salon workers, truck drivers, and construction workers," Shierholz said. "A previous EPI analysis found that in 11 commonly misclassified occupations, workers misclassified as independent contractors lose out on thousands of dollars in earnings and benefits per year, compared with workers doing the same job with employee status."
"Since this rule was proposed, opponents of this rule have waged an all-out misinformation war, claiming that independent entrepreneurs and business owners will now be forced into employee status against their will," the economist noted. "The reality is that if the Trump administration's rule was allowed to stand, workers with far less power to actually set the terms and conditions of their employment—not bonafide contractors—would have continued to lose out on basic worker protections, earnings, and benefits to which they should be entitled."
The Washington Post reported Tuesday that "the rule is expected to face an onslaught of legal challenges from companies. It has faced extensive criticism from businesses and industry groups, including those representing Uber, Lyft, DoorDash, and other ride-share and delivery platforms. But labor officials say they have carefully considered possible litigation and are confident that the rule would withstand a court challenge."
Some Republicans in Congress are already taking aim at the policy, with U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Ranking Member Bill Cassidy (R-La.) threatening to challenge it under the Congressional Review Act.
Meanwhile, Senate HELP Committee Chair Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a longtime labor rights advocate, praised the administration's new move to "stop unscrupulous employers from deliberately misclassifying their workers and cheating them out of hard-earned wages," adding that "when 60% of Americans live paycheck-to-paycheck, workers need labor laws that protect them, not allow them to be ripped off."
Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) Chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) also offered praise, saying that "I am thrilled to see the Biden administration continuing to put its pro-worker commitment into action with this new final rule."
"With gig work playing a larger role in our economy, it's more important than ever that workers are protected under federal law and have access to all the rights to which they're entitled," she said. "This new policy will
ensure that the workers who have fallen through the cracks—from rideshare and delivery drivers to janitors and home care workers—will finally be able to access Social Security benefits and unemployment insurance and be guaranteed overtime and minimum wage pay."
"The rule is also an essential check on large, wealthy corporations who have skirted their obligations to these workers even as their labor makes the companies" profits possible," she continued, adding that the CPC looks forward to working with President Joe Biden and Su to ensure it "is implemented fairly and equitably across the country and industries."
The department's announcement came a day after Biden renominated Su as labor secretary—a decision also celebrated by progressives, including Jayapal and Sanders, who called on the Senate to stop stalling.
"Julie Su has spent her career as a dedicated public servant, fighting tirelessly for working people, especially the lowest-wage workers, domestic workers, immigrant workers, and workers of color," Jayapal pointed out. "She deeply understands how the Department of Labor should work and the needs of our modern economy."
"There is so much work still to do to raise wages, lower costs, and fight for the working people of this country, and we need Labor Secretary Su to achieve it," the CPC leader added. "We urge the Senate to move swiftly and finally confirm this extremely qualified nominee."
Sanders said that "I strongly support Julie Su's renomination to serve as Secretary of Labor. Her strong pro-worker track record as acting Secretary shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that she is the right person for the job. Her tireless and consistent work for working families across the country should continue as secretary of labor and I urge my colleagues to support her nomination."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy