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

Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 781 posts

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#81

Post by twblalock »

The corollary to this is that Uber and Lyft will now be able to exert more control over drivers.

Contractors have certain legal freedoms that employees do not, such as setting their own hours, being able to turn down work, driving for both Uber and Lyft, etc -- that last one seems pretty common.

I wouldn't expect those freedoms to last long after they are reclassified as employees. After all, this is Uber and Lyft we are talking about. We know how they behave. Now the government has both increased their operating costs and given them the ability to exert more control over their drivers.

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#82

Post by Pfhreak »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #67
Pfhreak wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pedantically, sure. Ethically, maybe? Legally -- we'll see how this case goes. I think it's reasonable to argue that because the contractor had no input into the rate, and if they decline too many rides they might be removed from the service, that they do not have the power to set rates.

Having no input into the rate is meaningless. If they can decline work below a given rate then that's equivalent to setting their own rate -- the rate is set at the point where they start declining work. Obviously that may mean they don't get as much work, but setting your own rate doesn't grant immunity from supply and demand. What would make this a lot easier is if the apps would just allow you to set a rate below…

Is the amount a driver makes totally transparent to them ahead of accepting a ride, sufficient that they could refuse anything that makes them less than $XX/hour or travels to an area they don't want to travel to?

Are drivers removed from the platform if they refuse too many rides?

It seems like the drivers actually have very little power to enact any effective bargaining over rates in practice.

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#83

Post by three_seagrass »

ars wrote: post #28
criddell wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like something universal health care could fix. It seems crazy that access to health care is connected to your employment status.

Universal healthcare is not the only way to fix that.... You could use the existing healthcare exchange, and just give people a certain percent of their salary that can only be used to buy healthcare. Then let them buy as they choose.

The difference being the employers have buying power for all their employees and can keep costs down, as opposed to individual buyers on the exchanges.

The problem with switching healthcare in America is that any new system that doesn't allow Americans to think, "I've got mine, you can worry about you" is difficult. Whether that's forced exchanges where everyone pays the same or universal healthcare (where everyone pays the same).

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#84

Post by jedberg »

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #22
rdgthree wrote: post #7

It strikes me that these articles are always biased in the direction of the benefits of being an employee. I have several friends that actively choose to be contractors because they prefer the (legally protected) flexibility to decide their own hours, among other things. It's a personal decision, and there are upsides and downsides in both directions. Sure - some (non-insignificant) portion of Uber and Lyft drivers w…

Some things, like not being able to set their own rates, meant drivers were never contractors, even if they wanted the perks of contracting (e.g, choose your own hours). Saying 'I wish to be a contractor' isn't legally sufficient: the agreement needs to permit setting rates.

Not all contractors set their own rates. Sometimes they bid on an already published rate. Which is what happens here. Uber/Lyft tell you what you will make before the ride starts.

If you accept, you just set your own rate.

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#85

Post by dpiers »

heavyset_go wrote: post #59
foogazi wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do contractors really set their own rates?

Yes. As far as I'm aware, Uber and Lyft drivers are not able to set their own rates on the platforms.

Drivers who use the Uber platform in California are now able to set their own rates.

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#86

Post by twblalock »

henryfjordan wrote: post #68
carlosdp wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I highly doubt Uber or Lyft will allow an employee on their payroll to work for only 2 hours a week...

Why not? They currently do just that...

> Why not? They currently do just that...

Right now they do that for contractors. After the drivers are reclassified as employees, things might change.

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#87

Post by marcrosoft »

booleandilemma wrote: post #49
marcrosoft wrote: post #5

This is an example of regulation getting in the way of innovation again. It’s like they want the medallion taxi system again.

This is an example of regulation getting in the way of innovation... If by innovation you mean the abuse of people forced to work in the "gig" economy, then sure.

Abuse?? Nobody is forced to work anywhere in the U.S. If they can find a better situation they should. Why hurt their situation with regulation?

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#88

Post by ajhurliman »

foogazi wrote: post #27
JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some things, like not being able to set their own rates, meant drivers were never contractors, even if they wanted the perks of contracting (e.g, choose your own hours). Saying 'I wish to be a contractor' isn't legally sufficient: the agreement needs to permit setting rates.

Do contractors really set their own rates?

The answer for contract software engineering is: "Technically, but not really". You interview, then they offer you a job/ contract which pays a certain hourly amount, and you can accept/decline/counter offer just like a full time job.

The equivalent here would be something like, "Okay candidate, I offer you a job as a contractor and the contract says you get paid based off of this algorithm. Accept or decline?"

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#90

Post by xxpor »

nerfhammer wrote: post #41
LargeWu wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regulation, in general, exists primarily as a response to exploitation. If drivers felt they were getting paid equitably, had fair dispute resolution, had access to benefits, etc., there wouldn't be a need for this.

why doesn't this happen for truck drivers or traditional taxi drivers, who are also usually contractors?

For truckers:

a) a class A CDL takes a lot more effort to obtain than a regular driver's licence. there's a much more constrained supply, so you don't end up with a race to the bottom on the demand side as much.

b) the quantity of hours truckers can work is set by the federal Department of Transportation. with electronic logging becoming mandatory, that'll cut down even more on people being able to work off the clock.

For taxi drivers:

you absolutely do end up in this situation. there's just no multi-billion dollar company to make headlines about. medallion owners in NYC are all shady characters too.

Post reply on HN