361–370 of 602 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That people are able to do what's best for them is a faulty assumption and the key argument for regulation.
This attitude that people need to be saved from themselves usually leads to worse conditions for everyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What were the changes and it's negative results you observed?
They moved responsibility for determining whether a person is acting as an employee or a vendor in the vast majority of cases to the client, who must demonstrate a bunch of factors (I'm not a tax guy), not least - the "vendor's" right to substitute himself for a replacement they subcontract (via employment or otherwise) to, irrespective of the client's deemed suitability of the chosen replacement - the "vendor's" rig…
However I suspect this is because _most_ of their contractors are actually just disguised employees, and I say this as a contractor myself. However the legitimate contractors are also getting hit by the backlash now that the clients are on the hook for penalties.
Personally, I'm going to keep contracting past April as I generally only work with small businesses anyway and they can see quite clearly that my contract does not fall within IR35. If however they had 100 contractors instead of say, 1-2, it's much harder to make that determination.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uber drivers can't pick up hailed rides anywhere. That has nothing to do with the jurisdiction, it's simply not a function of the app. If they did, they would be taxi drivers.
I think you're coming from a completely wrong view point. There are no "Uber drivers" these are taxi drivers that choose to (at times) use the Uber app to get clients. Depending on the local jursidiction, they might be absolutely free to do street pickups. For example in Finland someone driving for Uber could pickup someone from the street.
There is no ability to use the Uber platform for hailed or other ad-hoc rides, they must be ordered through the platform and all payments must go through Uber.
Uber provides the commercial insurance to drivers they need when carrying passengers, for example (pretty sure they do this in all areas they operate, but I'll wait with bated breath to be told they don't in Bulgaria). If a taxi driver who also worked for Uber picked up a hailed ride it would not cover them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But people I know who are trying this gig economy part-time can pick their own "clientele": Uber, Lyft, Postmates, Door Dash, etc... they work for whichever client they want, on their own schedule. As an "employee" of Uber, I doubt they will want you working for competitors.
> pick their own "clientele": Uber, Lyft, Postmates, Door Dash, etc... They aren't clients, they are the "platforms". The clients are the people paying, not the people collecting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this different than if I worked as an employee at a pizza restaurant as a delivery driver and I use my own personal car for making the deliveries?
I have in fact delivered pizzas as a W2 employee, and had to use my own car. While I didn't ask if they'd provide a car for me, because I've never heard of such an arrangement, I highly doubt the answer would've been yes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The main difference is that the handymen can easily look for other customers elsewhere to find an alternative job. Uber drivers don't have this choice. I'm not sure what the situation is like in France, but most Uber drivers I've seen have the Lyft app open at the same time. It seems pretty trivial to download another app and use both at the same time (easier than almost any other freelancer finding more sources fo…
Lyft doesn't exist in France.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The inability to negotiate is the key point. On the point about choice, there are areas where drivers can drive for Uber or Lyft though so some drivers do have choice.
Just because the process is automated doesn't mean that no negotiation is taking place. Uber drivers negotiate all the time, every time they shut down the app due to rates being too low at the moment they negotiate. So Uber is forced to set rates at levels where they have enough drivers and enough passengers. It isn't like a job where if you just stop working they will fire you, you can drop in and out of uber whenev…
At least in California, driver pay, and what the customer paid are decoupled. There is no more "surge" per say, it's just a dynamic price for the user, which might be completely different than the one the driver has.
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…
The 'market price' changes as Uber decides it should. There is no actual market where agents can set their prices present.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The inability to negotiate is the key point. On the point about choice, there are areas where drivers can drive for Uber or Lyft though so some drivers do have choice.
The inability to negotiate is the key point. On the point about choice, there are areas where drivers can drive for Uber or Lyft though so some drivers do have choice. Where I drove for Uber, there were five platforms. But Uber had 90%+ of the rides. In a year, I think I got one Lyft request, and nothing from any of the others. If there were plenty of customers on all platforms your statement might be valid, but that…