Drivers, consumers, taxpayers to Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court: Big Tech’s ballot question seeks to shield Big Tech from employer and consumer liability under Massachusetts law and is unconstitutional
BOSTON — Today, a group of 13 Massachusetts citizen-plaintiffs — including drivers, consumers, and advocates for workplace justice — supported by the Massachusetts is not for sale coalition argued their constitutional challenge to Big Tech’s ballot initiative before the Supreme Judicial Court.
“Big Tech corporations have been pouring millions into their campaign to pass this ballot question because it would shield them from having to comply with essential workers’ rights laws, consumer protection laws, and their responsibility to pay taxes,” said Wes McEnany, Executive Director, Massachusetts is Not For Sale. “Here in Massachusetts, our laws and the dignity and safety of our people are not for sale to billion-dollar corporations. And we believe that as more voters learn the truth about Big Tech’s scheme, they will see through it as well.”
The plaintiffs challenged the certification of Big Tech corporations’ ballot question on the grounds that the proposed ballot question violates the Massachusetts constitution by stripping away worker protections guaranteed by more than fourteen (14) separate employment and civil rights statutes, eliminating Big Tech’s obligations under Massachusetts social welfare programs such as unemployment insurance and paid family and medical leave, and exempting Big Tech from liability for injuries to consumers and the public under Massachusetts common law. In doing so, the plaintiffs argued, Big Tech corporations’ proposed ballot question seeks unfathomably broad exemptions from responsibilities to which all corporations operating in the Commonwealth are bound by law.
“Every worker deserves a livable wage, benefits, and anti-discrimination protections, and every passenger who uses these companies’ services deserves to be able to hold the corporations accountable for their safety,” said Fred Taylor, Business Representative of the North Atlantic States Regional Council of Carpenters and President of the Worcester NAACP. “Big Tech corporations are trying to pull the wool over Massachusetts residents’ eyes with this ballot question, but we’re not falling for it. These are basic rights and rules in our state, and we’re not going to let these huge corporations flout them.”
Article 48 of the Massachusetts Constitution requires that all provisions of a ballot question must be related or mutually dependent. Today, the plaintiffs argued that the corporations’ ballot question contains multiple unrelated, independent subjects fundamentally changing the relationship between drivers and the companies under employment and civil rights laws, the relationship between passengers and the company under Massachusetts personal injury and accident law, and the relationship between the Companies and the Commonwealth under social welfare and tax laws. A similar ballot question in California, Proposition 22, has already been ruled unconstitutional by a district court and is currently pending appeal at the California Court of Appeals.
###
Twitter: @MassNotForSale | Facebook: @MassNotForSale | MassachusettsIsNotForSale.org
Massachusetts is not for sale is a growing multi-racial alliance of drivers, delivery workers, consumer advocates, civil rights organizations, immigrant, faith, labor, community organizing, racial and environmental justice groups who oppose the $100M+ campaign by Big Tech companies to undermine our law, as they recently did in California through Proposition 22, to avoid paying taxes and Social Security, shield themselves from liability to the public, and win special exemptions from labor and civil rights laws.