Wasn't it so that in France Ryanair pilots are not allowed to be self-employed subcontractors either? (A model that Ryanair prefers.) Both makes sense to me, neighter of them can really set their own prices, schedules or work-conditions.
Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees
481–490 of 602 posts
Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees
#482> 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…
Indeed. I can see your marketplace view,
But if you see 3 ads in a row that you know are a bad deal for you or are just not great in term of timing.
You could still read the ads on the handyman site.
In Uber world, you get banned of the site.
> In addition, if the driver has declined more than three rides, Uber may temporarily disconnect the driver from its application
I think you missed the part about subordination. Yes, you could have a service like Uber where you are still your own boss. ( Curb, for instance, is the response from the traditional taxi drivers )
But in the case of Uber, I tends to agree that they get away with a lot of subordination, without giving away work contract.
Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees
#483> 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…
The classification of uber drivers as employees mostly means they have to pay more tax and less money goes to drivers and uber. People will argue employees have more rights and this is good for them, but the primary benefit of someone being an employee is to the state and the benefit is financial. If too many people become self-employed, the state can't finance itself anymore. The line between 'employee' and 'self-em…
Are self-employed people paying less taxes per se in France?
Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees
#484Earlier quoted context omitted.
Waiting for a ride with both apps turned on is actually pretty common.
Drivers aren't paid while they're waiting though, right? It seems to me like this is just holding two separate jobs of the same type (which I don't think is uncommon for the types of positions one might have at Target or Walmart), with the only difference being more flexibility of which hours to work.
It's not just which hours, it's also how many.
If you're a contractor hired to build a shed and it takes you 8 hours, you're there all day. But if you can build it in 2 hours, you get to go home, and you still get paid the same.
If you're a Target employee brought in to do inventory and it takes most people 8 hours but you finish in 2, you're only going home if you don't want to get paid for the other 6 hours. Otherwise you're going to be stocking shelves or sweeping floors or working a register until the clock runs out.
Driving works like the first one. If you can make a 45 minute drive take 42 minutes, you get to keep the other 3 minutes. (In theory if you can make a 45 minute drive take 15 minutes you get to keep the other 30 minutes, but good luck with that.)
Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees
#485Earlier quoted context omitted.
If people were taking home $100k driving for Uber I would accept this argument, since I wouldn't want to interrupt the good opportunity with regulations. As it is, I see the preponderance of arguments on the side of it being regular employment without the expected benefits. For what it's worth every Uber ride I've taken I would have taken at double the price, it's possible they could afford to pay their full time dri…
> If people were taking home $100k driving for Uber I would accept this argument, since I wouldn't want to interrupt the good opportunity with regulations. So only rich people should have opportunities?
How did you get that conclusion? What he is saying if there were advantages over normal employment, it would be more palatable
Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees
#486All of this is a legal system that has a square hole and a circular hole not knowing what to do with a triangular peg. Governments job is to realize that this is a new category of work and create laws specifically to address it.
why does the government need to bend backwards to allow underpaid jobs ?
The government can set any kind of regulations it wants without force-fitting into the antiquated dichotomy of “contractor” vs “employee”
Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees
#487Earlier 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 people were taking home $100k driving for Uber I would accept this argument, since I wouldn't want to interrupt the good opportunity with regulations. As it is, I see the preponderance of arguments on the side of it being regular employment without the expected benefits. For what it's worth every Uber ride I've taken I would have taken at double the price, it's possible they could afford to pay their full time dri…
> As it is, I see the preponderance of arguments on the side of it being regular employment without the expected benefits.
Let's evaluate this for a moment.
Suppose the people driving for Uber could get a job somewhere else as an employee. In this case they willingly chose the driving job with e.g. more flexible hours over the other job with employment status, so why are we second guessing their choice and trying to take it away?
Now suppose the other job isn't available to them. Job prospects for unskilled workers are pretty bad, so it's either Uber or unemployment. Then it's the same thing -- they'd rather drive for Uber as a contractor than be unemployed, so why should we take that option away from them?
The theory behind forcing them to be employees is that it's "better" for them. If they're employees they get employee benefits. But then they can't work part time anymore, because if the company is going to pay full time benefits then they're going to want full time hours. Flexible hours go away too, because if they're forced to pay benefits they can use them to attract people who don't need flexible hours and no longer have to accommodate people who do.
Then the benefits cost money, but the company's margins are pretty thin so the only place to get the money is by making rides more expensive. That hurts all the working class people who have to pay more for rides, but it also lowers demand for rides. Lower demand, fewer drivers.
So a lot of the existing drivers, and specifically the most vulnerable of them who can't find another job or need the flexible schedule, lose their jobs.
They might be better off if we don't "help" them like this.
Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees
#488Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same is true (at least in my experience) in America. Over 40 hrs/week means the employer has to pay out extra benefits. This is also why employers do not want you to work over 39 hours if you're not salaried.
In the US, over 40 hours simply means 1.5x your regular payrate after the 40th hour, if you're "non exempt", i.e. hourly. Some employers might offer something more. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime
If the company has more than 50 employees they are required to pay for healthcare if you work more than 30 hours a week [1].
https://www.employmentlawhandbook.com/federal-employment-and...
Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees
#489I don't understand why this is so complicated. If someone works for you, they are an employee. If someone works with you, they are a contractor. I think the French definition of subordination is a great defining characteristic. However, my understanding is that US law doesn't make this distinction thus introducing a gray area.
>I don't understand why this is so complicated. If someone works for you, they are an employee. If someone works with you, they are a contractor.
Well, no, it's not that simple.
For one, how many employees at your company could stop coming in tomorrow, and then six months from now go back to work like nothing happened?
Being able to work whenever you want seems like a clear differentiator from real employees. There's no requirement from Uber for you to actually work.
Re: Highest French court reclassifies Uber drivers as employees
#490Earlier quoted context omitted.
If people were taking home $100k driving for Uber I would accept this argument, since I wouldn't want to interrupt the good opportunity with regulations. As it is, I see the preponderance of arguments on the side of it being regular employment without the expected benefits. For what it's worth every Uber ride I've taken I would have taken at double the price, it's possible they could afford to pay their full time dri…
> As it is, I see the preponderance of arguments on the side of it being regular employment without the expected benefits. Let's evaluate this for a moment. Suppose the people driving for Uber could get a job somewhere else as an employee. In this case they willingly chose the driving job with e.g. more flexible hours over the other job with employment status, so why are we second guessing their choice and trying to…
One of the issues here is about Uber getting away with paying the same type of taxes than other businesses, which creates an unfair situations with other companies & a race to the bottom for workers rights.