Minnesota House Bill HF4447

Minnesota 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/29/24
• Refer: 2/29/24

Caption

Delivery network companies required to create portable benefits accounts for app-based drivers, companies required to purchase occupational accident insurance, income tax treatment of contributions to and distributions from portable benefits accounts provided, and rulemaking authorized.

Impact

A crucial aspect of HF4447 is its efforts to create a specific insurance framework by requiring DNCs to purchase occupational accident insurance for their drivers. This insurance will cover medical expenses and provide income replacement for injuries sustained while engaged in delivery services through the company’s platform. The bill also preserves the independent contractor status of app-based drivers, with specific provisions ensuring that their rights to work concurrently with multiple platforms are maintained. This represents a balancing act between providing benefits and protections without converting drivers into employees, thus retaining their flexibility.

Summary

House File 4447 (HF4447) introduces significant changes aimed at delivering improved protections and benefits for app-based drivers employed by delivery network companies (DNCs) in Minnesota. The bill mandates that these companies establish portable benefit accounts for their drivers, ensuring that drivers receive contributions that equate to two percent of their earnings in the previous quarter. This new structure aims to provide a safety net for drivers, allowing them to access funds for various permissible uses such as health insurance premiums, retirement savings, and support during emergencies. Moreover, the bill explicitly protects drivers' earnings and contributions from being commingled, which is pivotal for their financial autonomy and access to benefits.

Contention

The preemption clause within HF4447, which states that all matters concerning network companies and app-based drivers are exclusively under state jurisdiction, has sparked contention. Critics are concerned that such language can limit local governments from enacting regulations that address specific regional needs or concerns related to gig economy workers. This centralization may prevent more tailored responses to local labor conditions, thus undermining community efforts to safeguard workers’ rights and benefits. Legislative discussions may also focus on the adequacy of the protections offered by portable benefits and the implications of retaining an independent contractor classification amidst rising demands for labor rights in the gig economy.