According to foreign media reports, should Uber and other taxi drivers be regarded as contractors or employees? It’s a matter of intense debate and controversy in court, especially in California. For now, Uber and LYFT will have to classify drivers as employees early this year, but proposition 22 may change that ruling. The judge said Uber could continue to send messages to drivers urging them to vote for California’s proposition 22. Last week, Uber drivers in the state filed a class action against the company for injunctive relief on activities carried out through Uber apps. < / P > < p > in his ruling on Wednesday afternoon, California High Court Judge Richard Ulmer rejected the temporary restraining order, saying the plaintiff had waited too long to file a complaint. He also wrote that if a ruling was made in favour of the plaintiff, Uber’s rights would be infringed. < p > / Uber’s activity started in August, according to the plaintiff. The reason why the plaintiffs have to wait several months to sue and seek injunctive relief has not been explained. Such delay makes people doubt their case… The temporary restraining order prohibiting speech activities is “a typical example of prior restraint” and “the most serious and intolerable infringement of the rights of the first amendment.” < / P > < p > on November 3, proposition 22 will be voted on in front of California voters. In Ulmer’s view, the case has become a “meaningless issue” because there is not enough time to hear the case in a few weeks. Early this year, Uber and LYFT will be required to list their drivers as employees under the California AB5 act passed last year. If the No.22 proposal is passed, it will effectively make AB5 invalid in car sharing. < / P > < p > drivers first filed class action because they felt that the language in the message seemed vindictive – Uber would fire them if they didn’t support the measure. Lawyers for the plaintiffs believe that although judge Ulmer’s ruling did not go their way, it was also a victory. < / P > < p > almost immediately after filing the lawsuit, Uber ended the activities of proposition 22. An unnamed Uber executive also vowed in the affidavit that the company would not take any action against drivers who opposed proposition 22. < / P > < p > “it’s great and I’m happy,” said David Lowe, one of the lawyers representing the driver. “We have achieved two main objectives of the litigation.” Spontaneous combustion at a Guangzhou Motor vehicle intersection and other traffic lights in Shenzhen