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

161–170 of 357 posts

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

#161

Post by ihm »

solidasparagus wrote: post #114
sushisushisushi wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really outside the Overton window. Universal healthcare has strong majority support right now. Employers and shareholders benefit significantly by reducing options for workers and by making it difficult for workers to change jobs; the source of the resistance is there, in the plain language of power, not in some imaginary spectrum of what's considered to be acceptable.

Universal healthcare has decent (but not 'strong majority') support in the abstract [1]. In terms of concrete proposals (i.e. once you've answered the questions of what universal healthcare is and how you pay for it), there is not a single plan that is even somewhat popular. [1] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-have-no-safe-...

I don't know if this is a comprehensive source. Here's a poll where 70% of the respondents supported Medicare for all[1].

[1] https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/412545-70-...

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

#162

Post by lsiebert »

whoopdedo wrote: post #89
TheRealDunkirk wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You're #1 states two things as if they are the same. Your final statement seems to imply that the affordability of auto insurance derives from the above conditions. Except you make one glaring mistake: auto insurance is not regulated. Rather, the rates that insurers can charge is highly regulated. #3 also doesn't make sense because people don't buy the auto insurance that they want. They buy the insurance that the st…

That's false. California, for example, has regulations on auto insurance rating factors and discounts (banning, for example, discrimination on sexual orientation or discounts not offered to the general public), among other regulations.

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

#163

Post by ummonk »

manigandham wrote: post #57

People seem to forget that "professional driver" is an actual job available for close to a century now if you really wanted a full-time position. Uber already works with FTE drivers at higher tiers like Lux and Black. All of the drivers I've asked over 1000's of rides have said they prefer the freedom and flexibility to work on their own time. Yes they want more money, but not at the cost of the flexibility. They alr…

Yeah, I keep seeing these articles get posted and it makes no sense. Most drivers seem to want to have the freedom and flexibility to choose when they work. That absolutely makes them contractors.

The only argument to be made here potentially is that some of the gamified rewards incentives to keep driving might be questionable and make the relationship more employer/employee-like.

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

#164

Post by roenxi »

wpietri wrote: post #156
roenxi wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't live in America, but having strong opinions is fun so I'll wade in anyway :D The things you are talking about are regulatory standards. I've not seen anyone really suggesting that regulatory standards are a problem in the Americas (on the contrary, everything I've read suggests if you have in insurance the whole process can be pretty comfortable). gp's post is, in my eyes, clearly going towards the point that…

> It seems like common sense to me that an individual will be better at choosing a healthcare provider than their employer. I have picked insurance as an individual and as an employer, and that is 100% wrong. Any kind of insurance is difficult to shop for, because it's for something you'll only really need if you're unlucky; that means it's hard to tell whether the choice you make is a good one. Health insurance is w…

> Health insurance is worse, because it's an extremely complicated product.

Get sick, go to hospital, insurer covers. There is a shortlist of things the insurer won't cover. You pay the insurer each month.

Insurance isn't complicated. It is a complicated by bad regulation that mean insurers aren't trying to sell to individuals.

> A company, on the other hand, gets to amortize the cost of figuring out the right options...

That sounds like a pretty decent argument until the implications are examined. An identical argument could be made for:

* Food

* Housing

* Schooling

* Entertainment

The truth is that the amortization of figuring out what people want is best done by the insurer, and then people just buy whatever their friends have. Like everything else.

> You might think it's fun/funny.

I think it is funny that I'm commenting on a system more than an ocean away, I'm not laughing at sick people. That would be a bit weird.

> No. The American system grew up as it did for particular local reasons...

The reasons are, in hindsight, stupid. They should switch to using a system that makes sense. Either the capitalist way or the socialist way. The crazy hybrid that is used in practice is crazy.

Just because there is a stupid system in place today is not a reason to stick to it, and everyone agrees with that idea.

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

#165

Post by toastal »

vadym909 wrote: post #125
thanatropism wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are Republicans basically evil?

No- They just favor business owners and the above average earners more and are highly distrustful of those not working or not making enough money. Extreme capitalists!

Sounds pretty evil to me. This is where you get the idea of 'corporations are people' to give more rights and them some to businesses to defend against your average person.

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

#166

Post by majormajor »

roenxi wrote: post #164
wpietri wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems like common sense to me that an individual will be better at choosing a healthcare provider than their employer. I have picked insurance as an individual and as an employer, and that is 100% wrong. Any kind of insurance is difficult to shop for, because it's for something you'll only really need if you're unlucky; that means it's hard to tell whether the choice you make is a good one. Health insurance is w…

> Health insurance is worse, because it's an extremely complicated product. Get sick, go to hospital, insurer covers. There is a shortlist of things the insurer won't cover. You pay the insurer each month. Insurance isn't complicated. It is a complicated by bad regulation that mean insurers aren't trying to sell to individuals. > A company, on the other hand, gets to amortize the cost of figuring out the right option…

> Get sick, go to hospital, insurer covers. There is a shortlist of things the insurer won't cover. You pay the insurer each month.

> Insurance isn't complicated. It is a complicated by bad regulation that mean insurers aren't trying to sell to individuals.

It's complicated in America because the right wing in America's position is not "if everyone buys private insurance it'll be good," but rather is "I have good cheap-to-me insurance through my job that I like, and I'll be damned if i contribute a penny to those who don't, and you shouldn't force them to buy it, even if that means that only the unhealthy people will be in the private market."

When Republicans complain about the ACA's health insurance regulations they're talking about regulations that mean "people should be required to have coverage to keep the market healthy" and "that coverage shouldn't be practically-useless bullshit"

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

#167

Post by sbov »

User23 wrote: post #150
ceejayoz wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is quiet shocking to see #1 getting posted over and over again. Yup. If anything, it'd make things substantially worse. There's a reason all the credit card companies moved to Delaware - they found the most favorable jurisdiction (and work to ensure it stays that way). Health insurers would love to all move to the most insurer-friendly jurisdiction.

Wrong. Everyone incorporates in Delaware because the Court of Chancery[1] has some of the most professional and consistent judges in the country. Both parties know what the judge is going to decide before it ever gets to trial, which makes reaching settlements and thus saving money far easier. A good businessman can work within the constraints of virtually any consistently applied set of rules. It's when court cases…

While that may be why some companies incorporate there, credit card companies specifically are headquartered in certain states (not just Delware IIRC) because, roughly speaking, the supreme court ruled that usury laws where they are headquartered is the only thing that matters. A while back several states tried to make high interest rates (20% or so) illegal and the supremes smacked them down.

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

#168

Post by cr1895 »

wpietri wrote: post #156
roenxi wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't live in America, but having strong opinions is fun so I'll wade in anyway :D The things you are talking about are regulatory standards. I've not seen anyone really suggesting that regulatory standards are a problem in the Americas (on the contrary, everything I've read suggests if you have in insurance the whole process can be pretty comfortable). gp's post is, in my eyes, clearly going towards the point that…

> It seems like common sense to me that an individual will be better at choosing a healthcare provider than their employer. I have picked insurance as an individual and as an employer, and that is 100% wrong. Any kind of insurance is difficult to shop for, because it's for something you'll only really need if you're unlucky; that means it's hard to tell whether the choice you make is a good one. Health insurance is w…

You might like to read up on the Dutch system. Everyone is compelled to have private insurance, but insurance is tightly regulated so that the basic level is more or less comprehensive. Insurers compete on the perks...specific hospital compatibility, vision, physical therapy, etc; you can buy nicer perks, but the basics are always covered.

Sometimes employers reimburse employees for health coverage, and sometimes they negotiate a nicer rate package that any employee is free to use; but it’s not tied to employment like it is in the US.

If you’re under 18 it doesn’t cost anything. If you can’t afford it you receive a government subsidy. GP visits are part of the basic insurance, and the system functions with the GP as a gatekeeper.

It’s certainly not a perfect system...for example, a non-urgent surgery might take months to be scheduled if demand is high.

But, overall, I’m convinced this is a vastly better system for society than what exists in America.

Edit: it’s funded through taxes, insurance premiums that are about €110-130 per month, and deductibles which are at least €385 per year

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

#170

Post by twblalock »

ihm wrote: post #161
solidasparagus wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Universal healthcare has decent (but not 'strong majority') support in the abstract [1]. In terms of concrete proposals (i.e. once you've answered the questions of what universal healthcare is and how you pay for it), there is not a single plan that is even somewhat popular. [1] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-have-no-safe-...

I don't know if this is a comprehensive source. Here's a poll where 70% of the respondents supported Medicare for all[1]. [1] https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/412545-70-...

> I don't know if this is a comprehensive source. Here's a poll where 70% of the respondents supported Medicare for all

The 70% don't understand that Medicare for all would kill off the private insurance industry.

A lot of people like the idea of a single-payer system but they never assume they would be forced to give up their current private insurance.

Tell people that their private insurance would go out of business or become restricted to very high net worth individuals, and then ask them how much they like Medicare for all. The polling numbers would drop like a rock. Everyone likes the idea of Medicare for all when it applies to other people but not to themselves.

Post reply on HN