California’s reform prosecutors are right to focus on corporate crimes against workers

Recently, San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin and Los Angeles District Attorney George Gascón filed suit against Handy, the home cleaning and maintenance company. Amid cheers to hold the company accountable for misclassifying 20,000 California workers, critics countered that Boudin and Gascón should be focusing their efforts on “real crime,” not on worker’s rights.

But the issues at play in the Handy suit are real crime. This gig work company has been stealing from its workforce and exposing people to sexual harassment and assault without offering any protections.

When critics dismiss cases like this as ancillary to public safety, our society risks continuing a dangerous cycle favoring corrupt corporate bottom lines and first-world convenience over human lives. Public safety includes being safe at work.

Workers’ lives have been in danger since Handy’s inception in 2012, with rampant cases of injuries, sexual assault and, recently, exposure to COVID-19

In 2019, when the California legislature passed Assembly Bill 5, the workers’ rights law that made it harder for companies to misclassify workers as independent contractors, our nonprofit, Public Rights Project, brought labor and community groups together with state and local governments to coordinate AB 5 enforcement.

PRP quickly learned that Handy was egregiously violating AB 5. Like other gig companies, Handy’s business model profited from improperly classifying workers as independent contractors, depriving them of benefits such as minimum wage, sick leave and protection from discrimination, which they are entitled to as employees. Handy goes even further, charging workers up to $90 a day for calling in sick and fining workers an additional $15 — an hour’s wage — for leaving a residence when customers made them feel unsafe or crossed the line into assault.

Handy has no dedicated place for complaints and no policies or training around sexual harassment and assault — an endemic issue for domestic workers — which are required by law for companies with more than five California employees.

From over 100 interviews, workers gave the following examples in which workers alleged that Handy didn’t take reports seriously, often penalizing workers instead:

“I was so shocked,” said “Pat” in San Jose who was greeted by a naked customer. “I left immediately because I was not comfortable entering the home. Right away, I sent a message to Handy’s customer service reporting the incident. I never received a response.”

Handy instead deducted $15 from her pay for leaving the harasser’s residence early, never acknowledged her report and refused to reverse the fee.

Another worker, “Lila” in Chicago, was asked to clean in her underwear for extra money.

“I refused and he threatened to leave a bad review claiming I was stealing,” she said. “I tried to leave, but he didn’t let me. He locked the door and got on top of me. I had some scissors on me, so I stabbed him in the back. He tried to press charges because he had to go to the hospital to get stitches. He claimed he caught me stealing and that’s why he locked me in. The case cost me $2,400 in lawyer fees and lasted six months. I was in therapy for a year.”

After following up a week later, Handy replied saying they were deleting her profile. They asked no questions about the attempted rape and didn’t let her know of any action taken to ban the customer.

“Katia” in New York said a customer repeatedly rubbed himself against her.

“I have a regular cleaning customer who has brushed up against me inappropriately,” she said. “He’s also offered to pay me off the books. I don’t say anything, I just do my best to avoid him. The first time it happened, I felt unsafe, but I worried I’d be fined or get a bad review if I left. Given that I’m short on money, I decided to take the risk and finish cleaning.”

She made a complaint to Handy but received no response.

In the wake of dozens of interviews echoing these experiences of negligence and abuse, PRP filed a complaint with the California Department of Fair Employment & Housing last August. The actions of Boudin and Gascón are vital in taking companies like Handy to task for turning a blind eye to — or even facilitating — crimes that threaten our collective public safety.

According to a national poll, survivors of corporate abuse like wage theft are over four four times more likely to have also been a victim of violent crime. This can lead to financial fallout — from medical debt to relocation expenses — putting them at higher risk of abuse as workers, consumers or tenants.

The communities the majority of gig domestic workers hail from have long been subjected to wage theft, housing discrimination, pollution, over-policing and the fallout of mass incarceration. Legal action against companies such as Handy is a means of helping these communities trust the legal system can serve, not just punish.

We call on people to give their support to reform-minded prosecutors like Boudin and Gascón who see the importance of prioritizing these offenses. Let’s recognize that corporate crime — not just street crime — has victims too and must be prosecuted.

This story was originally published May 14, 2021 at 6:00 AM.