New Prime denied arbitration again in wage lawsuit

[Electric Chicken]

I’m surprised the mafia hasn’t taken over the market. It’s more profitable than running numbers.

There is no mafia but they do LTL.

 

[GAnthony]

There is no mafia but they do LTL.

we're still here.....we're hiding......in the bushes, around the corner, in dark alley's, and the ravioli isle at walmart...

 

[Hammer166]

There is no mafia but they do LTL.

Waste. That's where da mob be.

 

[Nomad1]

California could care less how bad the lease deals were. This is merely tax revenue creation for them.

AB5 screwed over virtually every type of contractor there is in California. For example, painters. There are painters that have employees and are contracted by home builders. Under AB5, these painters businesses no longer exist. The builder must now employ them.

The list goes on for miles. In the short term, tax revenue skyrockets. In the long run, it will just increase the Exodus out of California.

The scam of a 1099 employee will end in California. A person can still own a legitimate business as a house painter and paint houses for people. This does not raise more revenue. Not sure where everyone else doesn't understand that. It makes employers pay what they should be paying in taxes instead of passing it off on employees through a 1099 and calling them a contractor.

 

[Hammer166]

The scam of a 1099 employee will end in California. A person can still own a legitimate business as a house painter and paint houses for people. This does not raise more revenue. Not sure where everyone else doesn't understand that. It makes employers pay what they should be paying in taxes instead of passing it off on employees through a 1099 and calling them a contractor.

The problem is the 'B' part of the test. As a house painter, you can no longer be contracted by another painter to do subcontracted work, you would have to be an employee of that firm.

That is so against the free association tenets of the Constitution, I don't see this standing up in court once it reaches the Federal level.

 

[Electric Chicken]

The problem is the 'B' part of the test. As a house painter, you can no longer be contracted by another painter to do subcontracted work, you would have to be an employee of that firm.

That is so against the free association tenets of the Constitution, I don't see this standing up in court once it reaches the Federal level.

The workaround to that is so simple. Contractor A hands off job to subcontractor A in full. Subcontractor A is now contractor B. Contractor B gives Contractor A a referral fee. Done.

 

[ironpony]

But in regards to trucking(because I don’t know anything else) the 1099 scam and lease purchase scam has gone on for years.

So... if it's a scam, by definition no one should end up with a truck, yes?

I paid off a lease, and ended up with a title to a truck, and a good friend of mine paid off his truck as well.

At one point, another guy went in, and walked through a spec for a Cascadia with a Freightliner sales rep. The cost for that truck compared within a few thousand dollars to the cost through a lease purchase.

You have to be a businessman to make one of these deals work at any company. If you really talk to most of the guys that do this, they don't have the slightest idea of what their costs are, their cost per mile to run down the road, or whether they're even making money. That's on the lease driver, not the company.

 

[Hammer166]

The workaround to that is so simple. Contractor A hands off job to subcontractor A in full. Subcontractor A is now contractor B. Contractor B gives Contractor A a referral fee. Done.

Sounds good in theory, but won't work in practice. Contractor A has the business because Customer A doesn't want to hassle with multiple contractors, and will balk hard at the idea of dealing with the overhead involved with multiple payees.

This doesn't need a workaround, the whack jobs in California's Assembly (and the state courts) need their teeth properly kicked in by an appellate court for passing (and upholding) such blatantly unconstitutional bs.

 

[Humble pie]

So... if it's a scam, by definition no one should end up with a truck, yes?

I paid off a lease, and ended up with a title to a truck, and a good friend of mine paid off his truck as well.

At one point, another guy went in, and walked through a spec for a Cascadia with a Freightliner sales rep. The cost for that truck compared within a few thousand dollars to the cost through a lease purchase.

You have to be a businessman to make one of these deals work at any company. If you really talk to most of the guys that do this, they don't have the slightest idea of what their costs are, their cost per mile to run down the road, or whether they're even making money. That's on the lease driver, not the company.

Just because people win the lottery doesn’t mean it’s a good plan for retirement. These programs (in general) are designed for people to fail.

 

[Nomad1]

The problem is the 'B' part of the test. As a house painter, you can no longer be contracted by another painter to do subcontracted work, you would have to be an employee of that firm.

That is so against the free association tenets of the Constitution, I don't see this standing up in court once it reaches the Federal level.

That is almost never the case. Those can work around this. Most of the time employees are called contractors by employers so they can get away without having to pay the SSI taxes and carry insurance on employees.

 

[Electric Chicken]

Sounds good in theory, but won't work in practice. Contractor A has the business because Customer A doesn't want to hassle with multiple contractors, and will balk hard at the idea of dealing with the overhead involved with multiple payees.

This doesn't need a workaround, the whack jobs in California's Assembly (and the state courts) need their teeth properly kicked in by an appellate court for passing (and upholding) such blatantly unconstitutional bs.

"Contractor A hands off job to subcontractor A in full."

What do you think I meant by that? I'll tell you. It means customer doesn't have to deal with two contractors.

 

[Mike]

The scam of a 1099 employee will end in California. A person can still own a legitimate business as a house painter and paint houses for people. This does not raise more revenue. Not sure where everyone else doesn't understand that. It makes employers pay what they should be paying in taxes instead of passing it off on employees through a 1099 and calling them a contractor.

Since you referenced painting houses, I will try to make it more clear.

You own a painting business. You have employees. You have contracted with a builder to paint the houses. Your business is dissolved effective January 1 under this new law.

That is just one example. You can see where I am going with that, and how that eliminates multiple businesses just in the housing market.

Back to trucking. A person who has owned a truck for 30 years, has their current truck leased to Landstar. He has a family in the state where he or she has lived for those 30+ years. Come January 1, he or she no longer has a business. I mention the scenario of a family because some will say the person should just move.

This is for nothing more than increased tax revenue.

 

[Nomad1]

Since you referenced painting houses, I will try to make it more clear.

You own a painting business. You have employees. You have contracted with a builder to paint the houses. Your business is dissolved effective January 1 under this new law.

That is just one example. You can see where I am going with that, and how that eliminates multiple businesses just in the housing market.

Back to trucking. A person who has owned a truck for 30 years, has their current truck leased to Landstar. He has a family in the state where he or she has lived for those 30+ years. Come January 1, he or she no longer has a business. I mention the scenario of a family because some will say the person should just move.

This is for nothing more than increased tax revenue.

That painting business will not be dissolved Jan 1. I heard some say that but it is not in anything I have read. Painting houses is not building houses. It is designed to fix the 1099 employee scam. How will it increase tax revenue? What one person doesn't pay in taxes another will.

 

[ironpony]

Just because people win the lottery doesn’t mean it’s a good plan for retirement. These programs (in general) are designed for people to fail.

Depends on the carrier. Some are little more than revolving used truck lots. However, to just arbitrarily say that all of these programs are bogus rip offs is disingenuous. It's up to the individual to evaluate each deal, and to determine whether it is viable or not.

How's this different than buying a used car? If you don't look under the hood to see if theres an engine in it, can you blame the seller? That's on the buyer. By the same token, a guy who gets involved in a lease purchase without reading and understanding the contracts, doing the work to prepare himself as a business owner, and doing the work to make the business successful is a fool. By far, the vast majority of drivers who get involved in these leases really aren't going to succeed, but that doesn't mean that Prime for example, is actively taking advantage of them.