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

361–370 of 387 posts

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

#361

Post by sn_master »

dgellow wrote: post #144
fallingknife wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't make sense to me. I did some contract work a couple years ago and: 1. The company set the hourly rate which meant they dictated how much I could earn 2. The company set the contract terms 3. The company told me what features to build and could penalize me if I decided not to build some 4. The company could evaluate my performance any way they wanted and terminate the contract at any time for no cause If…

1. As a contractor I negotiate my rates with the companies I work with. Uber drivers cannot do this. 2. I also negotiate contract terms. Uber drivers cannot do this. 3. Uber drivers are penalized for not taking rides, which is more akin to refusing a paid opportunity than building a feature. Again as a contractor I do negotiate the work I can and want to do. 4. For this point I agree with you. I can also terminate th…

I agree with you, but if the drivers set their own rate, some might go too low to get more rides and compromise on safety or use illegal workers and such to make up for it.

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

#362

Post by ryanlol »

1_person wrote: post #313
prepend wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s just too hard to organize drivers and delivery. I’ve never experienced a restaurant where their own delivery drivers are as fast, efficient, smart as Uber/etc. I’d rather just go pick it up myself than use restaurant delivery. I’m sure there may be exceptions somewhere, but even in Manhattan the deliveries that work for the restaurant sucked. I think it’s that there’s no simple feedback loop. An example…

Have you... actually ordered from a restaurant that's done self-delivery for more than 5 minutes? I've never, not even once, seen the same driver from one of these services. This is a huge problem, because every mapping service directs them to an automated exit-only gate that nobody anywhere has the power to open for them -- certainly not if they just sit there for 5 minutes helplessly then chuck it out the window an…

> because every mapping service directs them to an automated exit-only gate

You know that you can easily fix this, right?

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

#363

Post by AmericanChopper »

pmyteh wrote: post #341
AmericanChopper wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been working as a contractor for more than 10 years, doing stuff like writing software for banks. All of those points have allied to me for most of my career. If that’s a compelling case for Uber drivers not being contractors, then it’s also a case for independent contracting in general not being legal.

As long as you're being paid minimum wage and the other (limited) employment protections that apply to people with 'worker' status, then it won't matter at all. It's not illegal to have people as dependent contractors, it's illegal not to give them employment rights as a result. There is a whole separate question around tax status, but that's not implicated by this ruling as it's based on a separate set of caselaw.

Those protections don’t apply to me. I generally don’t have any employment rights at all, and the reasons given in this case for Uber drivers not being contractors would certainly also apply to most of the work I do too.

If I worked in the UK, I would presume this ruling makes my kind of work illegal, and there’s very little difference between this ruling and something like AB 5, which very explicitly make my line of work illegal. Luckily my jurisdiction has very few anti-contractor laws. The only one I run into is some case law around how long and independent contractor can work for before they become a de facto employee. Which is occasionally frustrating, but not on the same level as something like this. But any time I see this sort of thing I do get concerned that my jurisdiction will eventually get around to “saving” me from the working arrangement that has been massively beneficial to me over the past 10 or so years.

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

#364

Post by mytailorisrich »

josefx wrote: post #133
Kaze404 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not in the US but delivery apps are mainstream here as well, and pretty much every restaurant had their own delivery people (we call them motoboys here). Weird to learn that it's not the case everywhere.

I would be careful with the "learn" bit. I think almost every HN topic involving an internet based service ends up with claims that X didn't exist before X.com made it possible.

In this case it is factually true, certainly in Europe but probably in other regions, too.

I think perhaps many commenters here are very young, so when I say restaurants did not deliver they cannot remember how it was 20 years ago. Order over the phone for delivery was limited to a few types of food places (mostly pizza and fast food made by the same establishments).

As an online platform Deliveroo was perhaps not the first (Just Eat is older, though not as focussed on delivery) but in the UK (and perhaps Europe) they really made that service explode. Note, though that I did mention Deliveroo and similar services in my original comment, not only Deliveroo. I think this is also linked with the rise of smartphone and apps, which, really exploded in 2007 with the first iPhone. The same goes with Uber.

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

#365

Post by Closi »

djhn wrote: post #327
Closi wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is somewhere between A and C depending on what you call inefficiency - Assuming 20 minutes per order (3 per hour) at a minimum wage of c£9 per hour pre-holiday and any other benefits, you are talking about £3 per delivery. They need to pay more than this, as many drive and the fee needs to cover fuel, so call it £4 per delivery or something like that, it's somewhere between £3-£4 probably. So then you add…

The pools for Eats and ride-hailing are separate in most markets.

Well that’s silly, I assume that will change.

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

#366

Post by kbelder »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #257
maxsilver wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can, actually, make a circumstance illegal. The vast majority of regulation explicitly make circumstances illegal. "That ladder just happened to be placed there" . "The forklift happened to be parked that way" . "The room happened to have too many people in it" . "The fire extinguisher happened to be expired and failed to fire" -- all illegal circumstances (in various parts of the US, based on Federal/State/Local…

You can make actions illegal, and you can make not taking an action illegal, but you can't make not having enough money illegal, because "having money" is not an action that you can mandate people take. > "They needed to sue, but couldn't get a lawyer" is absolutely a circumstance we could make illegal. I mean -- I guess, technically you can, but it's one of the most insulting things I have ever heard. What are you g…

They made not having medical insurance illegal. Quite controversial, at the time.

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

#367

Post by [deleted] »

kingaillas wrote: post #299
sokoloff wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So Deliveroo is helping these restaurants survive the pandemic is your main argument? Or that they’d do just fine if no one had a website offering their food, but the Deliveroo website is an arms-race bleed-them-dry move?

Sometimes middlemen serve a useful purpose. For example, I like grocery stores because they deal with farmers and food distribution and save me from driving out to source my own produce from growers. Sometimes they... might not. It's all relative the cut they demand. So here, are food delivery companies worth ~30% of cost? Yes, all sort of anecdotes are possible to drum up in this situation. Long term, across the ent…

[deleted]

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

#368

Post by kingaillas »

sokoloff wrote: post #304
kingaillas wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes middlemen serve a useful purpose. For example, I like grocery stores because they deal with farmers and food distribution and save me from driving out to source my own produce from growers. Sometimes they... might not. It's all relative the cut they demand. So here, are food delivery companies worth ~30% of cost? Yes, all sort of anecdotes are possible to drum up in this situation. Long term, across the ent…

> Somebody is paying that [30%], you or the restaurant The customer is. They are the only one bringing money into the system over the long-run. The customer is paying for the ingredients, the property tax, the delivery, the lights, everything. The restaurant just handles the money.

I can't edit and add to my comment... so new post.

Basically what I think we're dancing around, is that perhaps the current business of model of restaurants is busted and has to change, post covid. The old model is rent a large space for indoor dining, cook/serve the food, sell high margin alcoholic drinks ;), plan for a steady stream of events/holidays (valentine's day, mother's/father's day, etc), try to locate near other office workers for a steady lunch customer base, and so on.

Maybe that doesn't work as well post-covid due to work-from-home a large shift to ordering out. I mean rent alone has got to be eating restaurants alive, when they don't need as much space now.

As far as middlemen and delivery, restaurants themselves are middlemen if you look at meat/produce being the actual materials and me, the hungry customer, wanting the spend cash for a product - but now eating at home.

Perhaps the new restaurant future is the rent smaller work spaces, or team up with other restaurants and have a booth with shared/common space, and serve mostly with delivery in mind. There's a place like this in my local large city, with a dozen or so vendors that rotate a little bit, sharing a large common area. It was packed every time I went, in the before times... not sure how it is doing now (website says they are mostly doing delivery so I suppose it is still up and running).

In which case a restaurant factors in the delivery fee/cut as an expense. Basically juggle it so part of the fee comes from not having to pay as much rent, and perhaps this delivery need is part of the new business model. Folks can still come by in person to get out of the house and save a bit, but factor in the majority of customers will order delivery.

I don't actually work in this industry so I don't know what actual numbers look like, but I do listen to the Planet Money podcast and a recent episode was about a restaurant that had to close due to high rents! It ended with the former owners wanting to open a new restaurant, but only if they owned the building.

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

#369

Post by Can_Not »

chrisseaton wrote: post #181
Larrikin wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would hate to live in the world you imagine where every single awful thing that isn't obviously illegal is considered acceptable by society.

And I'd hate to live in a world where you can drag anyone you want before a judge because you don't like what they're doing. I don't like the colour of your shirt, so I'm going to say it's objectionable. It doesn't break any laws or infringe any regulations, but I want a judge's opinion on it anyway. See?

So you'd be wasting the judge's time with a frivolous lawsuit the same way you're wasting our time with a frivolous starwman?
Post reply on HN