101–110 of 754 posts
In broad strokes, I support this because it's helping the driver who used to get great money but then has been getting the squeeze lately. While it seems like "big corporations complaining", I admit this does threaten certain companies, especially the ones that are not profitable. Charging more per ride or gig doesn't pan out well as ridership and usage drop in step. So far all our Uber rides have been subsidized by…
Does this mean drivers will need working visas? If so, it will drastically reduce the number of drivers.
Does this mean drivers will need working visas? If so, it will drastically reduce the number of drivers.
Unlikely, California is a "Sanctuary State" and essentially has no enforcement of state (or federal) laws governing "illegal" employment. If anything, they consider it to be a good thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
not only will they cap it as you have said, but generally you aren't allowed to be employed by multiple employers. almost every driver drives for both companies. the drivers are going to get shafted here in total earnings. they will work fewer hours and make more per hour, but won't be able to drive crazy hours on both apps any more.
> not only will they cap it as you have said, but generally you aren't allowed to be employed by multiple employers. Citation needed.
This is a standard condition of many employment contracts that the employee not also work for a competitor. Uber and Lyft previously had no such condition because drivers driving for both companies helped their case that drivers should be considered independent contractors. But now that drivers are employees by fiat, Uber will obviously ban driving for Lyft (or anyone else) and Lyft will obviously ban driving for Uber (or anyone else).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think it’s that simple. What is considered “work hours”? I assume it’s whenever the app is turned on and you are looking for fares, not just when you have someone in your car. I think a lot of drivers who use both have both apps turned on simultaneously? This would probably mean that you’d only be able turn on one at a time, which might mean fewer trips per hour. Another interesting consequence is potential t…
If they have to be paid minimum wage I think uber will be playing a much more direct role in setting their work hours, not just whenever the app is turned on. They probably can't prevent them from taking a second job but they can prevent them from doing their second job when they're on the clock of the first. This actually solves a common complaint lately of drivers cancelling one ride while they pick up someone on a…
They absolutely can and they probably will. You can put almost anything you want in an employment contract, and agreeing not to work for a competitor is an extremely common clause.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you explain how taxes are involved? What about reclassification causes the state to see more taxes raised?
Employees cost more for the company in terms of taxes paid, along with all the required benefits, minimum wages and making sure there's enough inelastic supply to meet the demand.
Even at the Federal level, the taxes net out the same. For employees, your employer pays half of your social security contribution, but as a contractor, you have to pay the employers half on your taxes.
The only thing I can come up with is unemployment insurance, which contractors don’t pay, but they also can’t collect unemployment.
If I’m missing something, please clarify.
For those of you who want to read the bill: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.x... . The pertinent part of the bill: 2750.3. (a) (1) For purposes of the provisions of this code and the Unemployment Insurance Code, and for the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration shall be considered an employee rather than an independent contra…
Which of these three clauses are not satisfied by drivers for a ridesharing company?
Can anybody here with proper experience break down the "ABC" test for me? It seems to me like the "C" part (that the work is "part of a company’s regular business") applies to literally any company who would hire a freelancer to work on their product or service.
(c) (1) Subdivision (a) and the holding in Dynamex do not apply to a contract for “professional services” as defined below, and instead the determination of whether the individual is an employee or independent contractor shall be governed by Borello if the hiring entity demonstrates that all of the following factors are satisfied:
(A) The individual maintains a business location, which may include the individual’s residence, that is separate from the hiring entity. Nothing in this subdivision prohibits an individual from choosing to perform services at the location of the hiring entity.
(B) If work is performed more than six months after the effective date of this section, the individual has a business license, in addition to any required professional licenses or permits for the individual to practice in their profession.
(C) The individual has the ability to set or negotiate their own rates for the services performed.
(D) Outside of project completion dates and reasonable business hours, the individual has the ability to set the individual’s own hours.
(E) The individual is customarily engaged in the same type of work performed under contract with another hiring entity or holds themselves out to other potential customers as available to perform the same type of work.
(F) The individual customarily and regularly exercises discretion and independent judgment in the performance of the services.
"Professional services" include:
(i) Marketing
(ii) Administrator of human resources
(iii) Travel agent services
(iv) Graphic design
(v) Grant writer
(vi) Fine artist
(vii) [IRS enrolled agent]
(viii) Payment processing agent
(ix) [Certain still photographer or photojournalist ... ]
(x) [Certain freelance writer, editor, or newspaper cartoonist ... ]
(xi) [Certain licensed esthetician, licensed electrologist, licensed manicurist, licensed barber, or licensed cosmetologist ... ]
[And even more exceptions for real estate agents, repo people, etc.,.]
For those of you who want to read the bill: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.x... . The pertinent part of the bill: 2750.3. (a) (1) For purposes of the provisions of this code and the Unemployment Insurance Code, and for the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration shall be considered an employee rather than an independent contra…
Thank you for posting the exact wording of the bill. Which of these three clauses are not satisfied by drivers for a ridesharing company?
This would be a hard sell because Uber and Lyft are in the business of providing transportation to people. They may argue that they're only providing the platform that enables drivers to provide rides, but considering the amount of evidence that says otherwise, I'd like to see their lawyer making that argument with a straight face.