When California lawmakers wanted a better deal for Uber and Lyft drivers working long, tedious hours, it was tough to fathom opposition. After all, basic protections like workers’ compensation are a no-brainer for service industry laborers logging full-time days.

Yet with its well-intentioned zeal, our Legislature has cast an inflexible blanket policy that’s now menacing much of California’s economic and cultural lifeblood: the arts.

The Jan. 1 implementation of the state “gig economy” labor law has left countless writers, musicians, performing artists and other independent creators confused, overwhelmed or downright frightened over the implications for their creative work. For many, the consequences could lead them to lose work, relocate or flee the vital artistic community at California’s beating heart.

Before we dig into that, let’s be clear: Assembly Bill 5, as the law is known, makes sense in plenty of industries. By putting new limits on who can be classified as an independent contractor, the measure will deliver key provisions like overtime and health care subsidies to many laborers who need them.

The law’s cornerstone is a three-part test to establish whether an employer may pay a worker as a contractor or must hire the person as a regular employee. Under labor rules, a worker hired as a regular employee gains automatic access to those major provisions — overtime, help with health care and a minimum wage.

If you’re driving 12-hour days for Uber to make ends meet, that prospect could promise a better life. But if you’re an artist, musician, or writer in the freer-flowing creative economy, AB5’s logistical demands and regulatory haze could make it nearly impossible to work and collaborate with a variety of co-creators.

Let’s go back to the three-part test. Under that new standard, workers can be hired as independent contractors, in many cases, only if they are free from the employer’s control, perform work that isn’t central to the employer’s business and have their own, separate business, trade or occupation in the same industry.

Consider a local band that wants to hire a few friends for weekend gigs. Unless those contributing musicians establish their own business units, the local band could face a slew of uncertainty just in scheduling occasional concerts.

Ambiguity and inconsistency in the new law doesn’t help, either. Fine artists are among those exempt from the three-part test, yet performing artists are not. But how are we supposed to define “fine” artist? Even the artist community is unclear on lawmakers’ intent.

Meanwhile, it appears at least some creative workers must be recognized as full-fledged employees when their income from a single employer surpasses just several hundred dollars a year. That foments a new burden that could be devastating for small businesses and other community organizations.

Already, we’ve heard fears that much of the music recording industry in California might decamp for cities elsewhere. Another worry: Some companies may curtail hiring practices just to avoid the paperwork and bureaucratic logistics of adding more regular employees.

It’s not just speculation. Vox Media-owned SB Nation dropped 200 writers in California because of AB5. Currently, the law limits freelance journalists and media creators to 35 pieces per publisher every year before they must be considered full-fledged employees.

Freelancers believe the restrictions violate their First Amendment rights and have sued as a result. Californians for the Arts, the statewide advocacy group, is pushing for clarity in the law and reasonable exemptions for arts and cultural workers across the board.

Related Articles Papering over the stream of bad news

Hold off on Ruth Bader Ginsburg replacement: Tom Campbell

Not all Californians are sold on split roll, affirmative action

Democrats can honor RBG by getting out to vote this November: Ada Briceño

Anti-maskers, anti-vaxxers; what is the real difference? It’s not too late to turn any of this around. AB5, signed in September by Gov. Gavin Newsom, is barely four months old. And there are already signals that the Legislature will rethink its approach. That’s good news because lawmakers owe it to the arts community to give deeper thought this time around, to invite the creative sector into their conversations, to make certain artists aren’t sacrificed to the legislative process. After all, the creative industries drive around $600 billion in annual output statewide, according to the 2019 Otis Report on the Creative Economy. That’s about a fifth of California’s $3 trillion gross state product.

Everyone deserves a fair shake, from ride-share drivers to upstart musicians, actors and filmmakers. But the path to equity and opportunity looks different in each field. It’s time for Sacramento to recognize that and invite the voice of the arts community into this, and future, important conversations.

Ravi S. Rajan is the president of the California Institute of the Arts.