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

371–380 of 602 posts

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#371

Post by manigandham »

madsbuch wrote: post #361
manigandham wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This attitude that people need to be saved from themselves usually leads to worse conditions for everyone.

I reckon you are happy that you didn't work in the mines when you were 9 years of age? Or am I completely wrong? Oh wait, naturally you would have been able to decide for your own best.

What a strange example. Nobody forced kids to work in mines.

Full-time driving jobs already exist. Anyone who wants one can already get one. Why take away their freedom to choose flexibility if they want it?

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#373

Post by manigandham »

duxut_staglatz wrote: post #360
manigandham wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not protecting the worker. You're taking away their freedom and choice and turning them into a different kind of worker. Perhaps if you speak to some drivers, you'll find the overwhelming response that shows they want flexibility, not another full-time job. These kind of laws do not take a majority to pass, and France had violent protests and riots by taxi drivers against ride-sharing with plenty of political…

There is nothing that prevents Uber from providing flexibility. The court has not ruled that Uber contracts were illegal, but that they were employment contracts (obviously, with the flexible hours Uber is known for) rather than (Uber) company to (the driver's) company business contracts.

Full-time employment will mean people work when and where Uber decides they do, with a flat-rate and no bonuses or surge pricing.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#374

Post by jiveturkey »

m11a wrote: post #96

> The criteria for self-employment include the possibility of building up one's own clientele, the freedom to set one's own rates, and the freedom to set the terms and conditions for providing one's services. Immediately I'd seem to agree with this statement. I think of typical self-employment businesses; hairdressers, freelance developers, etc and this seems to apply. You can set your own rate and your own terms, ev…

> I just don't agree with the criteria of the court in this case.

Well it isn't a personal opinion is it? The court presumably knows what the legal criteria for self-employment are. Unfortunately, the single page lay summary presented as TFA doesn't go into detail as to chapter and verse of the definition, but as it is the high court I think it's safe to assume they have it right.

EDIT: more detail https://www.courdecassation.fr/jurisprudence_2/notes_explica...

To wit:

====

The criterion of the link of subordination breaks down into three elements:

- the power to give instructions

- the power to control the execution

- the power to sanction non-compliance with the instructions given.

As for self-employment, it is characterized by the following elements: the possibility of building one's own clientele, the freedom to set prices, the freedom to set the conditions for the performance of the service.

====

By these definitions, it does seem clear that the Uber-driver relationship is one of employment.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#375

Post by Jommi »

def8cefe wrote: post #363
Jommi wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They may be free to do it under local law, but they would not be doing it as an Uber driver, they would be doing so as a taxi driver. 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…

Exactly, so we agree on the point - there are no 'uber drivers' per se, they are just contractors driving a car and intermittently using services to find clientele.

Uber provides some insurance in _most_ countries they operate in, but it's quite often the case that this is not enough and that other insurance (usually specific for their classification e.g. Taxi Driver insurance, or VTC insurance) is required. So your point on insurance is quite moot.

What's actually interesting is that some of Uber's competitors do have a street-hailing functionality, where the app essentially works as a virtual card terminal for hand-hailed rides. Cool!

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#376

Post by ldng »

namdnay wrote: post #243
oarla wrote: post #101

I am not sure I understand why this is a win for Uber drivers(genuine question). Is it considered a win because now they are treated as employees, so they will have benefits like sick pay, vacation days etc? What was the policy when they were not employees? Would they be penalized(financially) if they took a sick day? France already mandates some of these for contractors, so not a huge benefit, I think. I doubt it'll…

> This being in France, universal health care already covers everyone, so don't think that drivers are going to get a better healthcare coverage. A common misconception. Health insurance is not mandatory but highly recommended in France. Example: a dental implant will cost between 500 and 800 euros, depending on the materials used and the local market rates. Social security will pay about 200e of that. The rest is up…

For employee, universal public healthcare is mandatory and paid to the state. Part is paid directly by your company (you don't see it on your wage slip) and part is paid by the company on your behalf (appears on your wage slip). The same goes for retirement.

Also taken from your salary, a complementary private healthcare plan chosen by your employer. I just literally learnt yesterday the mandatory part on the company private complementary plan. You can not reject the company plan if it does not suit you. But you can take another complementary plan on your own. BUT only one is eligible for reimbursement. So you basically loose part of your salary if you choose a better complementary health plan as recipient of your health bills.

Now, if you are a freelancer, well, you also have to pay all of that, all by yourself this time. The affiliation is different (RSI) but you still have to pay universal public healthcare. Then you are free to have a complementary private healthcare plan or not.

All critical health issue are covered by universal public healthcare. Less critical stuff like dental implants or ultra-thin glasses are not. You don't get a hole if you don't have complementary health insurance, you get a cheap dental plate.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#377

Post by thenewnewguy »

sigstoat wrote: post #147
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.

> In America, there are tens of millions of people who work more than one job. not simultaneously, or even interleaved in 30 minute increments.

Yes, but this is due to the fact that most jobs require your physical presence, Uber does not.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#378

Post by blablabla123 »

m11a wrote: post #96

> The criteria for self-employment include the possibility of building up one's own clientele, the freedom to set one's own rates, and the freedom to set the terms and conditions for providing one's services. Immediately I'd seem to agree with this statement. I think of typical self-employment businesses; hairdressers, freelance developers, etc and this seems to apply. You can set your own rate and your own terms, ev…

In Germany the kind of work from your example is highly regulated.

That said, if you put an ad to build a shed for £100, expect a low quality result. Of course you can put all kinds of criteria but at some point you will either get screwed over or nobody will answer the ad. I also doubt that there are many people working on such gigs in a sustainable manner, even if the criteria are proportionate to the price.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#379

Post by def8cefe »

Jommi wrote: post #375
def8cefe wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They may be free to do it under local law, but they would not be doing it as an Uber driver, they would be doing so as a taxi driver. 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…

Exactly, so we agree on the point - there are no 'uber drivers' per se, they are just contractors driving a car and intermittently using services to find clientele. Uber provides some insurance in _most_ countries they operate in, but it's quite often the case that this is not enough and that other insurance (usually specific for their classification e.g. Taxi Driver insurance, or VTC insurance) is required. So your…

>usually specific for their classification e.g. Taxi Driver insurance, or VTC insurance

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#380

Post by username90 »

Jommi wrote: post #368
username90 wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Thank you. You seem to get the itch nearly completely. However you are missing one thing where Uber and Lyft have gone overnoard to the greedy side: 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.

Ah, I thought they just took a cut like most platforms. Kinda like Appstore or Steam.
Post reply on HN