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

201–210 of 781 posts

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

#201

Post by julienb_sea »

c3534l wrote: post #56

I'm not surprised. Uber and Lyft try co classify their workers as contractors when it comes to taxes and benefits, yet undermine workers abilities to actually be independent contractors when it suits them to do so. If you want to be a platform that helps connect drivers with passengers, then be that app. You can't then go in and set rates, not pay per client, not give contractors the ability to work for the customers…

Part of the reason Uber and Lyft work so well for riders is due to how they structure the relationship between drivers and their platform. Drivers are required to conform to the platform's payment structure. This enables predictable up-front pricing for rides before they are even requested. This enables the surge pricing system, which rapidly ramps up supply to match surges of demand.

Drivers can decline rides at will, but if a driver excessively declines rides there is punishment for this. This makes perfect sense as the platform calculates projected rates and surge pricing based on driver availability. Unnecessarily declining rides provides a poor user experience for riders, and riders ultimately can choose to take their business elsewhere. This means drivers need to be disincentivized to decline rides in order to maintain the quality of the platform.

Ultimately the relationship between driver and platform is structured to ensure a consistent driver and rider experience. The benefits arguments are more interesting, and maybe there does need to be a system for driver benefits like health insurance if they are working full time for the company, but ultimately these costs will fall squarely on consumers.

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

#202

Post by jcims »

thekyle wrote: post #97

What I'm guessing will happen if Uber/Lyft are forced to treat drivers as employees is that those driving full-time will be hired and everyone else will be let go. The employees will lose some control over what hours they work and may be forced to sign non-compete agreements (not sure if that would fly in CA). What I don't understand is why Uber/Lyft don't just allow drivers to set their own prices. Whatever their pr…

Probably because they would end up losing money, drivers would be willing to work for less.

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

#204

Post by JMTQp8lwXL »

KKKKkkkk1 wrote: post #171

It's interesting how often Silicon Valley companies blitzscale an unsustainable business model and then leave public investors holding the bag. In the Uber and Lyft case, the time bomb was the regulatory issue. Which investors should have known about, given that these companies have been breaking the law since day 1. Tesla with their full self driving is also an example of this dump the risks on the bag holders patte…

Somebody chose to pay the IPO price. Nobody could've offered to buy at that price, or interested parties could wait for the price to fall (if the party felt the IPO price was unreasonable). Typically, the underwriters will ensure there's interest at a given price range, prior to the listing. The demand was there.

I place some blame on the companies (and it is their responsibility to list potential risks in their public filings), but also it's somewhat the fault of buyers who scooped up millions/billions dollars worth of shares at sky-high valuations.

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

#205

Post by heavyset_go »

Game_Ender wrote: post #162
heavyset_go wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have several friends that actively choose to be contractors because they prefer the (legally protected) flexibility to decide their own hours Those legal protections can be enforced by those who have the means to hire a lawyer. Yes, white collar contractors often get to enjoy the legally enshrined protections to decide how, when and where their work is done. They are often paid twice as much or more than their sa…

Uber drivers can set their own rates in some parts of CA [0]. It’s a pretty big change brought out by these lawsuits to make the drivers as independent as possible. 0 - https://www.npr.org/2020/01/28/800437791/due-to-new-californ...

That's a weird message for Uber to send, that Uber drivers are only contractors in some parts of California where judges are upholding the law, but in the rest of the US Uber drivers are employees.

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

#206

Post by save_ferris »

stale2002 wrote: post #191
threepio wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm afraid you're repeating Uber's favorite talking point, which is that everyone should respect the worker's decision to be an employee or contractor. Nobody disputes that Uber can have employees or contractors (or both), or that drivers should, in principle, be able to choose what status they hold. The problem is that Uber currently exerts so much control over its "independent contractor" relationships that they ha…

> The problem is that Uber currently exerts so much control over its "independent contractor" relationships that they have become, as a matter of law, employment relationships. Sure, this could be true. But people should recognize that a possible solution to this, is for companies to provide more flexibility and control to these people, such that they stay contractor but also get the additional contractor benefits, a…

This would likely involve allowing drivers to set their own rates or handing over driver allocation responsibilities to another party. It’s really hard to envision a world where Uber hands over those kinds of abilities to someone. Companies like this rely on owning and setting the conditions of a market to keep prices competitive.

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

#207

Post by danepowell »

threepio wrote: post #186
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…

I'm afraid you're repeating Uber's favorite talking point, which is that everyone should respect the worker's decision to be an employee or contractor. Nobody disputes that Uber can have employees or contractors (or both), or that drivers should, in principle, be able to choose what status they hold. The problem is that Uber currently exerts so much control over its "independent contractor" relationships that they ha…

This is an argument against treating drivers as contractors, but it's not an argument against the OP's point, which is that a contractor relationship might be beneficial for some non-negligible part of the population, even if it's not beneficial more generally. And the fact that articles don't acknowledge this is notable.

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

#208

Post by ghaff »

three_seagrass wrote: post #101
ghaff wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really believe those aren't decades away for door-to-door?

Waymo started publicly testing level 4 cars last year, and reportedly has 600 cars testing level 5. It isn't decades away anymore.

I find it somewhat amusing there are still people bought into the self-driving hype other than in limited circumstances.

Does anyone actually believe these companies at this point? Who actually aren't saying much any longer.

I'd be far less surprised if Google shutdown Waymo in a year or two than if they actually introduced a door-to-door driving service in an urban area without a safety driver present.

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

#209

Post by dfdz »

threepio wrote: post #186
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…

I'm afraid you're repeating Uber's favorite talking point, which is that everyone should respect the worker's decision to be an employee or contractor. Nobody disputes that Uber can have employees or contractors (or both), or that drivers should, in principle, be able to choose what status they hold. The problem is that Uber currently exerts so much control over its "independent contractor" relationships that they ha…

>I'm afraid you're repeating Uber's favorite talking point

True, but that does not mean rdgthree's argument has no merit.

> Nobody disputes that Uber can have employees or contractors

What about the California judge?

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

#210

Post by heavyset_go »

dpiers wrote: post #85
heavyset_go wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The majority of people who drive for Uber are not in the parts of California where the justice system is upholding the law, though.
Post reply on HN