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

Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

courdecassation.fr

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 602 posts

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#291

Post by darkwizard42 »

duxut_staglatz wrote: post #283
c3534l wrote: post #260

Counterpoint (from the basis of what I know from how the US, not France, classifies independent contractors): 1. Uber drivers also drive for Lyft and other services 2. They can reject a passenger when the call comes in 3. They bring their own tools to the job (their car) 4. They provide their own training and technical qualifications (they're responsible for getting a drivers license, license plate, etc.) 5. They set…

Do they work with limited supervision? The company imposes the itinerary and the driver’s fare is adjusted if this itinerary is not followed. The monitoring is automatic instead of having a boss peering over your shoulder.

Fares are not adjusted for drivers if they don't take a ride. Rides are provided to the driver because the company believes they are the best driver for the job (closest, maybe they have preferences to go in that direction)

source: work for lyft.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#292

Post by intopieces »

reaperducer wrote: post #126
m11a wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See, this is key. If Uber has to class them as employees, it should also be able to deny them from working on other platforms. It should also be able to set working hours. And deny drivers the ability to refuse rides if they wish to keep their job. It could provide a daily salary and not let drivers decide or see fares. Because this is what employment typically entails.

If Uber has to class them as employees, it should also be able to deny them from working on other platforms. Why? In America, there are tens of millions of people who work more than one job. They're still employees; just employees of more than one company. Fred's Plastic Fork Factory can't tell me I can't moonlight at Alice's Diesel Cafe and Firing Range.

Anti-Moonlighting clauses are perfectly legal, though not without controversy:

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/...

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#293

Post by rtkwe »

mucholove wrote: post #182

Couldn’t Uber solve the problem if the drivers could accept / deny / bid up / bid down?

Currently Lyft (haven't used uber in ages but I assume they do the same) gives an exact price as you're selecting a destination before you're assigned a driver, to allow driver price negotiation you can't give an accurate price before a driver accepts. At best you could give the driver more of the company cut but Uber is already lighting mountains of cash on fire as it is to increase driver income.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#294

Post by avianlyric »

hnewsshadowbans wrote: post #266
avianlyric wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t assume that US wage slave practices are universal. Most of the developed world has very strong worker protections and a recognition that mental health and flexible working is important. We can provide jobs with good benefits, flexible hours, accommodations for parents etc without resorting to the employment model Uber trumpets. The EU proves this is possible (it’s far from perfect, but empirically better than t…

Then you get less innovation, less productivity, and less upward mobility. Don't pretend there isn't a cost. Goofing off in your cubicle and then going off to a picket line to keep your UBI isn't real independence. The future lies in something greater than the wageslave model of America or the dependency model of Europe.

Empirical evidence suggests otherwise.

For productivity the US trails behind most EU countries and the EU as a whole [1]

Same again for social mobility, US trailing badly [2]

So if the cost of the EU model is higher productivity and social mobility, then I’m all in.

As for innovation, that’s harder to comment on. But the success of US tech companies is certainly notable.

[1] https://data.oecd.org/lprdty/gdp-per-hour-worked.htm

[2] https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranked-the-social-mobility-...

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#295

Post by darkwizard42 »

smallgovt wrote: post #179
coliveira wrote: post #151

Kudos for the French. If a driver works full time driving for Uber she should be compensated as a full time worker.

In all likelihood, moving drivers from contractor to employee status will result in lower pay for drivers. Uber won't foot the larger employment tax bill. They'll just lower driver wages and increase customer prices.

More likely they will enforce the hours that the employee can work. If you are idling around at 4 AM in the burbs, they aren't going to pay you full rate, they will just kick you out and set working hours. If you don't like the hours, you get fired.

Less flexibility for drivers is probably a guaranteed outcome

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#296

Post by AnthonyMouse »

michaelmrose wrote: post #219
andrewla wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the strongest argument against this point of view is that the drivers can opt to work for multiple car services to get a handle on their price structures. It's certainly possible for a traditional employer to allow that arrangement, but you have to admit it is an uncommon thing. It's much more analogous to a contractor working for a general contractor -- if I'm a plumber I can take gigs from multiple general…

If target allowed you also work for Walmart that wouldn't transform their employees into contractors.

Target pays workers hourly wages. It would be quite something if they allowed you to work at Walmart during the hours you're being paid an hourly wage by Target.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#297

Post by reaperducer »

def8cefe wrote: post #156
reaperducer wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You absolutely can refuse a customer as long as it's not descriminatory, like most other businesses. Depends on your jurisdiction. For example, taxi drivers in Chicago were notorious for refusing to take people on trips that were too short, or too far out of the CBD. Sometimes they'd even refuse to take people from downtown to the airport because if traffic is bad, or there was a long wait in the staging area at the…

That's a fair point, they forbid you refusing short trips most places I'm familiar with. I wasn't really thinking about that in this case, mostly people asking you to take them sketchy places or belligerent customers which are the only reasons I consider it. An important distinction is it's local law that forbids that, not a company policy like with Uber. Just a few days ago I had some drunk customers screaming at me…

Just a few days ago I had some drunk customers screaming at me in my cab and shaking my seat under the impression I was legally required to drive them. They earned a very long walk home to think about it.

I had a nearly identical situation when I Ubered. In spite of multiple warnings, their behavior didn't improve. When I dropped them off in the middle of nowhere they insisted that I was required by law to carry them. Nope. I'm not a public bus.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#298

Post by darkwizard42 »

cambalache wrote: post #261
datashow wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at the same time.

Is the driver driving 2 cars at the same time? Is he making two travels one for Uber one for Lyft at the same time?

No, but at any given moment he is signed in and available on both platforms. Who should front the bill for the waiting time?

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#299

Post by bsanr2 »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #289
alistairSH wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your shed example, a builder could contact you and negotiate the price (perhaps the $100 price you set is completely unrealistic). That's not possible with Uber - there is no price negotiation - only declining/accepting a ride. Similar argument for changing toppings on a cake - a caterer can negotiate changes to the cake - an Uber driver has no such flexibility. Regardless, given corporate (human?) nature is to le…

> That's not possible with Uber - there is no price negotiation - only declining/accepting a ride. That is price negotiation. The market price changes all the time in response to supply and demand. If you're not willing to do it for a lower price and someone else is, you lose business to them. An hour later there is more demand and you can get some business at your price. Or you can lower your price (accept both ride…

It's not a direct negotiation, it's a negotiation by proxy.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#300

Post by davengh »

incadenza wrote: post #142
reaperducer wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Uber has to class them as employees, it should also be able to deny them from working on other platforms. Why? In America, there are tens of millions of people who work more than one job. They're still employees; just employees of more than one company. Fred's Plastic Fork Factory can't tell me I can't moonlight at Alice's Diesel Cafe and Firing Range.

Such a clause is pretty common in employment contracts.

I've seen these precluding secondary employment with competitive entities, but it seems there'd be little competition between Fred's and Alice's businesses (based on name alone).
Post reply on HN