I think that the objection is not that the bill is unclear about this situation. It's that the increased cost of treating Uber drivers (or similar work) as emp

I think that the objection is not that the bill is unclear about this situation. It's that the increased cost of treating Uber drivers (or similar work) as employees will mean that it is infeasible to hire people as they do now. The bill doesn't address (I assume -- I haven't read the bill) because it's not a think the bill is intended to address. If I understand correctly, the bill is intended to address the situation where large companies are avoiding paying employment tax and benefits because they hire the majority of their employees to do piecemeal work. Will it really result in the side effect that piecemeal work will cease to exist if workers have to be hired as employees? I don't know, but I think that's what's being suggested.