Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uber Drivers Are Contractors, Not Employees, Labor Board Says

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 357 posts

Re: Uber Drivers Are Contractors, Not Employees, Labor Board Says

#31

Post by prepend »

sgustard wrote: post #25

I am forced to treat the people who cut my lawn and clean my house as employees, according to tax law, for funding unemployment insurance among other things. But Uber's labor force, without which literally the company wouldn't exist, are not eligible for the same benefits. The logical next step is that the company has no liability for anything that happens to you in one of their cars.

You treat your lawn care person and maid as employees? I guess if they are full time. My lawn care is completely contractor based- they provide tools, they set schedule, they don’t have a uniform set by me. They are exactly contractors. Same with my maid.

If I for some reason had an estate that required employee Lawncare this would be different and I would hire someone.

There’s a definition from the IRS in the US for employee and contractor that’s not exactly black and white but has many tests for who is an employee vs contractor.

Re: Uber Drivers Are Contractors, Not Employees, Labor Board Says

#32

Post by orangecat »

romwell wrote: post #17
ralusek wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean "true" supply and demand? What was happening before was true supply and demand. They offered a rate, people were capable of consenting to the terms while accounting for expenses, and they did. Then an intermediary stepped between the consenting transactors and told them that they could no longer accept those terms, and now those transactions can no longer transpire, regardless of whether or not both…

>They offered a rate, people were capable of consenting to the terms while accounting for expenses See, on party here has a lot more data on said expenses, and all the incentives in the world to be misleading about them. The existing demand was not "true" under the reasonable assumption that nobody wants to work for less than minimum wage after expenses.

The existing demand was not "true" under the reasonable assumption that nobody wants to work for less than minimum wage after expenses.

"Want" is a complicated term in this context, but there are plenty of non-gig employees earning minimum wage or above, but less than minimum wage after subtracting expenses like commuting.

Re: Uber Drivers Are Contractors, Not Employees, Labor Board Says

#33

Post by gridlockd »

sgustard wrote: post #25

I am forced to treat the people who cut my lawn and clean my house as employees, according to tax law, for funding unemployment insurance among other things. But Uber's labor force, without which literally the company wouldn't exist, are not eligible for the same benefits. The logical next step is that the company has no liability for anything that happens to you in one of their cars.

> I am forced to treat the people who cut my lawn and clean my house as employees, according to tax law, for funding unemployment insurance among other things.

It's the other way around: The people who cut your lawn force you to treat them as employees. What stops you from hiring a "proper" contractor?

> But Uber's labor force, without which literally the company wouldn't exist, are not eligible for the same benefits.

Yes, because they are contractors. They set their own hours and choose whether to show up or not. They don't have any of the duties that an employee has. Therefore, they don't have any of the rights either.

> The logical next step is that the company has no liability for anything that happens to you in one of their cars.

It's not their car. Uber is a middleman. That's what people don't understand. Their "added value" is to bring together service providers and service users. They don't provide insurance or anything.

Re: Uber Drivers Are Contractors, Not Employees, Labor Board Says

#34

Post by BlackRing »

freewilly1040 wrote: post #7
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #4

One of the symptoms of our current political paralysis is the over-reliance on executive agencies to set policy instead of Congress debating and passing laws. Instead of trying to get net neutrality through law, we depend on the FCC trying to shoe-horn ISP into an old law designed for phone companies. Instead of explicitly talking about what protections people who sign up for the "gig" economy should get, we try to s…

Also the courts. Which is incredibly slow and painful for everyone involved.

This is by good design. Laws and action made in haste are rarely positive.

Re: Uber Drivers Are Contractors, Not Employees, Labor Board Says

#35

Post by prepend »

antaviana wrote: post #13
glitchc wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take a stand against who? The politicians are empowered by regular Americans who support them. Your neighbors and friends.

And half of these regular Americans have an IQ below average.

That’s not quite true since there are many Americans with exactly average so there aren’t half below average.

Maybe you could argue that half is below median IQ if you use a bunch of significant digits after the decimal, but I don’t think there are any exams that attempt to measure with such precision.

Re: Uber Drivers Are Contractors, Not Employees, Labor Board Says

#36

Post by TheRealDunkirk »

dcosson wrote: post #23

It’s sad that the idea of people being able to get by and live a comfortable life without the benefits from a full time job is so far outside the Overton window that it’s not even mentioned in these conversations. That seems like such an obviously better outcome for everyone - what if we got rid of healthcare benefits and other types of favorable tax treatment that are tied to full time employment so that everyone is…

1. Deregulate the health insurance market so you can sell across state lines. 2. Employers start giving their employees the money they pay on their behalf. 3. People shop for the health insurance they want/need.

In a year, every other advertisement on TV would be for health insurance, like it is with car insurance now.

Re: Uber Drivers Are Contractors, Not Employees, Labor Board Says

#37

Post by gridlockd »

inkaudio wrote: post #29
ralusek wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean "true" supply and demand? What was happening before was true supply and demand. They offered a rate, people were capable of consenting to the terms while accounting for expenses, and they did. Then an intermediary stepped between the consenting transactors and told them that they could no longer accept those terms, and now those transactions can no longer transpire, regardless of whether or not both…

When you charge far less than the actual cost of service you're going to get demand that does not reflect the actual market, hence not true "true" supply and demand. If I was selling dollar bills for 50 cents I would sell a lot of dollars bills. We've seen this before it's called Groupon. A key difference between Uber and Groupon is there are more drivers to con then there are businesses. Uber is losing billions doll…

Even then, having the city of New York set the price according to "utilization" isn't supply and demand either. It's price fixing.

Re: Uber Drivers Are Contractors, Not Employees, Labor Board Says

#39

Post by povertyworld »

teej wrote: post #20
ralusek wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean "true" supply and demand? What was happening before was true supply and demand. They offered a rate, people were capable of consenting to the terms while accounting for expenses, and they did. Then an intermediary stepped between the consenting transactors and told them that they could no longer accept those terms, and now those transactions can no longer transpire, regardless of whether or not both…

> They offered a rate Uber offered a rate that was subsidized by investors. That is not true supply and demand.

Isn't moving the demand curve by burning capital still a matter of supply and demand?

Re: Uber Drivers Are Contractors, Not Employees, Labor Board Says

#40

Post by xur17 »

TheRealDunkirk wrote: post #36
dcosson wrote: post #23

It’s sad that the idea of people being able to get by and live a comfortable life without the benefits from a full time job is so far outside the Overton window that it’s not even mentioned in these conversations. That seems like such an obviously better outcome for everyone - what if we got rid of healthcare benefits and other types of favorable tax treatment that are tied to full time employment so that everyone is…

1. Deregulate the health insurance market so you can sell across state lines. 2. Employers start giving their employees the money they pay on their behalf. 3. People shop for the health insurance they want/need. In a year, every other advertisement on TV would be for health insurance, like it is with car insurance now.

> 1. Deregulate the health insurance market so you can sell across state lines.

Why can't health insurance companies sell across state lines right now?

Post reply on HN