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

Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 387 posts

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#91

Post by Taurenking »

objclxt wrote: post #11
Taurenking wrote: post #2

Interesting. I wonder what consequences this will have in the british market(IIRC it being one of their major hubs in Europe). I don't think they'll pull out at this point though, but will make it marginally impossible for new drivers to be accepted (unless demand increases dramatically but I don't see that happening either due to "current events")

> will make it marginally impossible for new drivers to be accepted One thing worth noting is that the UK is already a little different from the US, because Uber drivers are required to have a private hire license issued by the city where you're operating. For example, in London you'd be required to have a full criminal background check, a medical examination, and pass a "topographical skills check" (basic route plan…

>So it wasn't like you could just apply to Uber and be up and running within a few days to begin with.

From the way some of the drivers manage some trips I've been on, I'd say that was definitely the case ahaha

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#92

Post by dexen »

rogual wrote: post #6

The court made very specific arguments: 1. Uber set the fare which meant that they dictated how much drivers could earn 2. Uber set the contract terms and drivers had no say in them 3. Request for rides is constrained by Uber who can penalise drivers if they reject too many rides 4. Uber monitors a driver's service through the star rating and has the capacity to terminate the relationship if after repeated warnings t…

>1. Uber set the fare which meant that they dictated how much drivers could earn 2. Uber set the contract terms and drivers had no say in them 3. Request for rides is constrained by Uber who can penalise drivers if they reject too many rides 4. Uber monitors a driver's service through the star rating and has the capacity to terminate the relationship if after repeated warnings this does not improve

I sure hope they'll declare all taxi drivers "employees of the cities they get the medallions from". With the city being equally on hook for all the insurances and other benefits for its taxi drivers.

How is the relationship, as described, any different from relationship between a city-managed tax driver? Aside of the star rating system - cities, having local monopoly, have literally no interest in maintaining high quality.

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#93

Post by Hydraulix989 »

ctoth wrote: post #81
roel_v wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel really bad for small restaurant owners. These large delivery companies totally take over their internet marketing too, registering a domain like ' - .com' and when you go to that website, you really have to pay attention to see that this is not the 'official' restaurant website and if you order through there, it's costing the restaurant a lot of money that they wouldn't miss out on if you'd order through their…

It's 2021. If I were opening a restaurant in I think the bare minimum I could do would be to register the base domain? Okay, let's assume I don't. I'm still getting people ordering that wouldn't otherwise order? because I didn't have a website? Still just don't see what's wrong here. I don't want to mention that I'm blind in every frickin HN post but I'm blind, and Uber Eats and etc. are great. and there are restaura…

Many restaurant owners are not as technically inclined as you. They might also think just having a social media presence is enough.

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#94

Post by vidarh »

emteycz wrote: post #67
namdnay wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An Uber driver has no opportunity to negotiate the rate with the customer. If in the app you said "I want to go to the airport" and then each driver interested replied with a quote, that would be rate negotiation.

You're negotiating with Uber, not with customers. Uber says take it or leave it, and you can work with another company if it has better terms/rate.

Uber pretends you're working for the customer, not them. That is a key element in their attempt to pretend they're not an employer.

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#95

Post by Nursie »

helsinkiandrew wrote: post #89
gpmcadam wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except they would actually have none of the benefits and security of being an employee by choice, so that argument is total tosh if you ask me No holidays, no sick pay, no minimum notice term, no overtime, no bonus, no 20% time, no paid lunches or benefits.

But they would be being 'paid' perhaps double the employee rate. Paying yourself and spouse with dividends (20% tax) rather than a salary, taking lots of business expenses, and withholding income until needed. A few years ago this was common in many London investment banking dev jobs - it appealed to both the companies and certain developers. Often those who had other business interests. I had a colleague whose contr…

Dangerous now, HMRC have the power to retroactively declare schemes like that illegal and go after back-taxes and penalties. The space used to be rife with those sorts of schemes, I used to get phone calls - "We found your CV on a recruitment site, we understand you're a contractor. How would you like to keep 95% of your gross earnings?"

They seem to have died down a lot now.

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#96

Post by Hydraulix989 »

throw_away892 wrote: post #71
roel_v wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel really bad for small restaurant owners. These large delivery companies totally take over their internet marketing too, registering a domain like ' - .com' and when you go to that website, you really have to pay attention to see that this is not the 'official' restaurant website and if you order through there, it's costing the restaurant a lot of money that they wouldn't miss out on if you'd order through their…

A customer won't order through 3rd party app if the restaurant doesn't partner to sell through them. Same case for internet marketing. What you should feel bad about are the excessive commission fees charged by those delivery apps.

It's not always obvious to users that the restaurants listed on these apps are not the real restaurants themselves.

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#97

Post by rrrazdan »

maxehmookau wrote: post #33

Of course they are. Everyone knows this. Uber just had good enough lawyers to put this moment off for as long as possible. They had to know it was coming.

I don’t know this. I have chatted with plenty of Uber drivers who are part timers who don’t know this or think this way about them as well.

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#98

Post by EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK »

There are apps that do everything Uber does except they don't handle the payments - pax pays the driver directly, in cash or by card via QR code. So the company does not transfer any money to the driver. It would be nearly impossible to argue the driver is an employee in this case. Sure, it's harder to collect commissions with this arrangement, but it's possible.

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#99

Post by terramex »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #61
lovedswain wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Before Deliveroo (and similar services) restaurants did not offer delivery at all. This is far from universally true, especially Asian takeaways typically hired their own driver, but the practice was also commonplace for many actual restaurants too

Traditional restaurants (in UK/Europe) did not offer delivery, for them Deliveroo or similar is their first foray into delivery, which is made easy because Deliveroo handles everything. Delivery for traditional restaurants has become a thing in the last 10 years or so when online services popped up. It's strange to argue about this...

In Poland many traditional restaurants did offer delivery through websites such as pyszne.pl and pizzaportal.pl since at least 2010. They hired their own drivers at the time, the switch to 3rd party delivery services happened here fairly recently but restaurant-owned cars are still common.

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#100

Post by Hydraulix989 »

herbstein wrote: post #86
gpmcadam wrote: post #62

Every Uber driver I speak to tells me how they prefer Uber to their previous job of a cabbie for a firm, they get flexibility, set their own hours and choose when to work Now they’re all permanent employees of Uber will they lose this flexibility? If some drivers weren’t happy with the status quo, why not take their skills and work for another firm?

> Now they’re all permanent employees of Uber will they lose this flexibility? Nothing in employment law mandates an inflexible work schedule. You can have perfect flexibility while being an employee.

In practice, employers have a business need for having employees with regular work hours.
Post reply on HN