HB 1789: Relating to Delivery Network Companies
Sponsor: Jim Murphy
OPPOSE
Corporate-favorable carveouts and broad classification provisions.
HB 1789 establishes new insurance rules for app-based delivery companies, requiring motor vehicle liability insurance when drivers are logged into the app or performing deliveries. It sets rules for coverage disputes, requires data sharing for accidents, and declares drivers as independent contractors "for all purposes," moving beyond insurance into broader labor policy.
What Does This Bill Do?
- Insurance Framework: Defines "logged on" vs "actively delivering" periods and assigns specific liability responsibilities to companies and drivers.
- Minimum Liability Limits: Requires insurance to meet minimum limits of $50,000 for bodily injury per person, $100,000 per accident, and $25,000 for property damage.
- Independent Contractor Declaration: Declares that delivery drivers are independent contractors "for all purposes," not just for insurance coverage.
Constitutional or Critical Context
While the bill addresses valid public-safety and financial responsibility goals, it includes a worker-classification declaration that skips a proper labor-policy debate. This provision could impact everything from unemployment insurance to workers' compensation. A normal voter reading "relating to delivery network companies" would not reasonably expect a sweeping employment-status declaration to be baked into insurance definitions.
Red Flags & Recommended Amendments
Hidden Worker-Classification Rider
The bill embeds a sweeping employment-status declaration inside an insurance framework, preempting broader labor-policy debates with real downstream costs to families.
Broad Insurer Exclusions
Allows personal auto insurers to exclude coverage entirely, potentially leaving drivers without protection for medical payments or physical damage if platform coverage is liability-only.
Act for Missouri Recommendation:
Act for Missouri opposes HB 1789. We support clear liability coverage for third parties, but the inclusion of "independent contractor for all purposes" language and broad insurer-exclusion terms extends too far beyond the bill's stated purpose.