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

381–390 of 602 posts

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#381

Post by madsbuch »

manigandham wrote: post #371
madsbuch wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

This was about regulations. I never commented on the uber drivers. Tbh, I have not enough insight to know if they should be protected.

I am merely pointing out, that is is easy to forget what regulations do for you. And yes, 9 year old have worked in mines before working age was regulated.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#382

Post by Jommi »

def8cefe wrote: post #379
Jommi wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Yes, your point? You need different insurance if you're going to be driving 10 hours per day instead of just to work, and from work. Who would have guessed?

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#383

Post by AnthonyMouse »

nickbauman wrote: post #328
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

This is not price negotiation really at all because uber can and does kick people off the platform for not accepting rides. https://www.businessinsider.com/how-uber-drivers-get-deactiv...

That says they get kicked off for canceling too many rides. Accepting a ride and then canceling it is different than not accepting it to begin with.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#384

Post by Jommi »

username90 wrote: post #380
Jommi wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

They started out with that, but I can't think of any other reason they changed it to the current model, except greed. And AFAIK this is only how it is in some US cities, like cities in California.

In Europe they still operate at a standard of 25% cut.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#385

Post by inkaudio »

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…

Uber limits the amount of rides you can deny, i.e. you deny 5 rides in 30min they log you off the platform after awhile you get penalized. They want high acceptance rate.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#386

Post by def8cefe »

Jommi wrote: post #382
def8cefe wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Yes, your point? You need different insurance if you're going to be driving 10 hours per day instead of just to work, and from work. Who would have guessed?

Why are you being so rude? You've been disrespectful since your first comment in this thread.

My point is even the French classify rideshare drivers and taxi drivers differently, per your own admission.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#387

Post by duxut_staglatz »

manigandham wrote: post #373
duxut_staglatz wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Only if Uber chooses to, it does not have to.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#388

Post by p1necone »

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…

With the handyman example there would be lots of other job offers with different price offers, there might be someone else asking for a shed for $150, or a deck for $130. With Uber prices are not decided by the customer or the employee.

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#389

Post by AnthonyMouse »

rcxdude wrote: post #369
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 all the time in response to supply and demand The 'market price' changes as Uber decides it should. There is no actual market where agents can set their prices present.

They decide it in response to supply and demand. Would you really expect them to raise prices when there is less demand and more supply and lower them when the opposite?

Which is what allows agents to set their prices. If prices are too high, some riders exit or more drivers enter which causes prices to decline. If prices are too low, some drivers exit or more riders enter which causes prices to increase. Is this not the ordinary mechanism of market pricing?

Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees

#390

Post by Frost1x »

The deteriorating relationship between what people widely consider 'employer' and 'employee' has put a lot of societal structures (businesses, democratic governments, etc.) at risk since income provides the abstraction most use (money) to provide necessities and wants.

Most all of these institutions are able to continue to exist because people accept their artificial constructs and play the roles due to wide belief that it provides a better life. In many places, quality of life or at least perception of quality of life is deteriorating for large segments of the population. This is, IMO, causing wide rejection of modern institutional roles laborers are dealing with. Many employers are breaking the social contract and people aren't happy--this is a risky game to play.

I propose much of the political unrest we're seeing in US politics is symptomatic of the population's general unrest and rejection of continued shifts against your typical laborer.

We can play legal/semantic games about how we define 'employee,' 'employer,' and 'contractor' but ultimately, if the general population disagrees, no matter how well we construct our rules and arguments, the institutions will fail if people widely perceive they're being cheated/deceived.

Post reply on HN