SB 35 revises Alaska law governing transportation network companies (such as ride-hailing platforms) and adds a parallel framework for delivery network companies and their couriers. The bill updates insurance rules for drivers and couriers, including when personal auto policies may exclude coverage, what coverage companies must maintain, disclosure requirements, and proof-of-insurance obligations. It also creates a new occupational accident insurance requirement for companies to cover injuries to drivers and couriers while they are engaged in prearranged rides or delivery services.
The bill also establishes minimum compensation standards for drivers and couriers. Transportation network companies would have to pay at least 120 percent of the state minimum wage plus $0.37 per mile during prearranged rides, and delivery network companies would have to pay the same wage floor and mileage rate for delivery work. The mileage rate would be adjusted annually for inflation, and customer tips could not be counted toward the company’s required pay. In addition, the bill clarifies that drivers and couriers are independent contractors, not employees, if certain conditions are met, and it expands statutory definitions to include delivery network companies, couriers, delivery services, and related terms.
Impact
SB 35 would amend multiple sections of Alaska statutes, primarily in Titles 21, 23, and 28, to create a more detailed regulatory structure for app-based ride and delivery work. It changes insurance law to allow exclusions in personal auto policies during network-based work, requires companies to maintain specified liability and uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage, and mandates occupational accident insurance with defined benefit levels. It also adds a new compensation statute for drivers and couriers and revises the state’s definitions and coverage rules for independent contractor status in this sector.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill had substantial support in the Senate, passing third reading 17-3. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, so there is no recorded discussion here to indicate detailed arguments for or against the measure. Based on the bill’s structure, the overall sentiment appears to favor stronger consumer, worker, and insurance protections for app-based transportation and delivery work while preserving independent contractor status.
Contention
The main points of contention likely involve the bill’s labor and cost implications. Supporters would likely emphasize guaranteed minimum pay, mileage reimbursement, and mandatory insurance/occupational accident coverage for drivers and couriers. Opponents may object to the increased operating costs for transportation and delivery network companies, the potential effect on pricing and service availability, and the bill’s attempt to codify independent contractor status while also imposing wage-like compensation requirements. Insurance coverage allocation between personal policies and company policies is another likely area of dispute.