BOSTON, May 6 (Reuters) - Massachusetts's highest court

on Monday weighed whether ballot proposals that would redefine

the relationship between app-based companies like Uber

Technologies ( UBER ) and Lyft ( LYFT ) and their drivers should

be allowed to go before voters in November.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court justices expressed

concern, during oral arguments in Boston, over parts of an

industry-supported group's proposal to ask voters to affirm that

under state law, drivers are independent contractors with some

new benefits but cannot be considered company employees.

But the six justices appeared unlikely to fully embrace

a labor-backed coalition's argument that the proposal runs afoul

of the state's constitution by broadly carving out the drivers

from a "laundry list" of unrelated worker protection laws.

Jennifer Grace Miller, a lawyer for the measure's

opponents, said voters would be asked to weigh in on not one

policy question but a series of separate areas of employment law

that could not legally be bundled together for their

consideration.

However, Justice Dalila Argaez Wendlandt asked whether

the measure could be viewed as addressing a single policy

proposal, that "app drivers aren't the employees of the

companies that match them up with rides."

The justices appeared likely to reject a conservative

group's argument that the state attorney general wrongly

certified a competing measure for inclusion on the ballot. That

measure, backed by the Service Employees International Union's

Local 32BJ, would ask voters to allow Uber ( UBER ) and Lyft ( LYFT ) drivers to

unionize under state oversight.

Justice Scott Kafker envisioned a world where voters

sided with the industry yet deemed the drivers as contractors

with the right to engage in collective bargaining.

"This seems to be what's good for the goose is good for

the gander," Kafker said.

A

May 13 trial is due in a 2020 lawsuit by the state's

attorney general accusing Uber ( UBER ) and Lyft ( LYFT ) of misclassifying their

drivers as contractors, not employees, for years.

Should the industry fail in court and at the ballot box,

Uber ( UBER ) and Lyft ( LYFT ) could face a sweeping overhaul of their business

model. Uber's ( UBER ) lawyers have said in court papers such a change

could force it to cut or end service in Massachusetts.

Uber ( UBER ) and Lyft ( LYFT ), along with app-based delivery services

Instacart and DoorDash ( DASH ), have spent millions of dollars

to support the ballot proposal that would cement the status of

their drivers as contractors under state law.

Using contractors can cost companies as much as 30% less

than hiring employees, various studies showed.

Flexibility and Benefits for Massachusetts Drivers, a

ballot measure committee whose contributors include the four

ride-share companies, is also proposing setting an earnings

floor for app-based drivers and providing them healthcare

stipends, occupational accident insurance and paid sick time.

Thaddeus Heuer, a lawyer for the measure's proponents,

said his clients had "a common purpose of defining that

relationship as not employer-employee."

The state high court in 2022 blocked a similar

industry-backed ballot measure over a provision it deemed

unrelated to the proposal.

To hedge its bets this time, the group is gathering

signatures for five versions of the ballot question, only one of

which it would have put before voters on Nov. 5.

Kafker, in his argument on Monday, questioned a provision

tucked into the broadest of those five versions that would

require drivers claiming they were fired for discriminatory

reasons to appeal to the employer.

"Generally don't have the person who's accused of

discrimination decide whether they discriminated," he urged.

A ruling is expected ahead of a July 3 deadline for the

ballot measures' proponents to submit signatures to the

secretary of state.