Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#211

Post by devcpp » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 1:37 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #116

hungryforcodes wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what if I legitimacy want to be a freelancer? Lifestyle reasons, freedom, whatever. I should have a choice.

You can be a freelancer just fine, nothing stops you from doing that. But not within the Uber framework because you aren' a freelancer within that framework. So this is pretty specific: the Uber framework does not check enough of the boxes that would allow their pseudo employees to claim they are freelancers, which effectively makes it just another tax dodge, which it always was.

Then fix the tax loopholes by making it about sales or revenue rather than employment.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#212

Post by thow-58d4e8b » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 1:38 PM UTC

AndyMcConachie wrote: post #129

pelorat wrote: post #99

Wait, I live in the Netherlands and I wasn't even aware that Uber was around. Didn't they get banned years ago, with only Uber Black being allowed?

You're forgiven. I also live in the NL and I almost never see them. The last time I saw an Uber was two years ago when a friend came from the USA and wanted to use their app to call a Uber. But then again I never take taxis either. For me it's either walk, bike or OV. It might be like that for you as well, which is why you forgot they exist.

Same in Finland, Baltics or central/eastern Europe. Almost everything is within walkable/bike-able distance. Public transportation has good coverage, is affordable and safe. Taking taxis is just not something people normally do. From here, Uber feels like a quintessentially American solution for a quintessentially American problem.

Real world example - taking Uber to my workplace would cost me one-two hours of net pay, and I'm in the top 5% earners. Another one-two hours of net pay to go back home.

For comparison - public transportation costs 3€/day regardless of usage, and only takes about 15% longer to get there.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#213

Post by devcpp » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 1:39 PM UTC

isbvhodnvemrwvn wrote: post #111

hungryforcodes wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what if I legitimacy want to be a freelancer? Lifestyle reasons, freedom, whatever. I should have a choice.

The reason for this is that you can be compelled by your totally-not-employer to pretend to want to be a freelancer. That's why different countries have various guidelines, e.g. if you economically depend on 1 contrahent (you fill in one invoice a month to the same one company), you are not self-employed, if you can't organize your own work however you like you are not self-employed, and so on. So in general if you a…

I know some software consultants that have one major client but appreciate the work mobility and forcing them to get into a full employment contract would restrict their opportunities and payment. Forget definitions, why should we outlaw this?

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#214

Post by devcpp » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 1:42 PM UTC

dagw wrote: post #102

hungryforcodes wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what if I legitimacy want to be a freelancer? Lifestyle reasons, freedom, whatever. I should have a choice.

Nothing is stopping you from being an actual freelancer. A large point of this ruling was that people working for Uber aren't actually freelancers, since they're not free to pick their clients or set/negotiate their own prices.

Then it's stopping you from working for a company that forces you to take clients at a given price without an employment contract and all its implications. What if that's what I want? I think some Uber drivers appreciate the work mobility.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#215

Post by kazen44 » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 1:42 PM UTC

fallingknife wrote: post #137

jacquesm wrote: post #27

Rightly so. The 'gig economy' is abused by quite a few companies to create employment like situations without the required trappings (social security payments, employee protection, hourly minimums and so on). This was long overdue, let's hope it has precedent effect for other companies that abuse the ZZP construct.

'Employment' is abused by the government to provide social benefits that it doesn't want to pay for. A job should trade work for cash and no more.

sadly, that is not how capitalism works in practice. employers have a vastly higher amount of leverage at the negotiation table compared to employees.

Dutch society (and most of western Europe) has made an explicit choice to create a social contract in which employees and employers are bound by the law of the government in question. and that law contains rules about employment.

mind you these rules exists because of the risk of the threat of violent uprisings in the 1850's. the revolutions of 1848 are a result of working in the way you just stated. it leads to massive unrest and instability.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#216

Post by kazen44 » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 1:43 PM UTC

eplanit wrote: post #186

gilrain wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are badly out of touch. People take the jobs they have to take to survive. The choice you imagine does not exist for most of humanity.

You make it sound like the job situation in the Netherlands is desperate. From what I can tell by searching, unemployment is only about 3%. Where's the desperation in that? Uber drivers I've talked to didn't join because they were desperate -- they joined to have more freedom and control.

ah yes. and the years 2009- 2015 where the same?

no they where far worse. its unemployment numbers are low now. but it hasn't always been the case.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#217

Post by bthrn » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 1:44 PM UTC

shimonabi wrote: post #97

Great to see that over 100 years of labour laws won by the workers' movements can't be innovated away in SOME countries.

The other side of this is that many laws do not neatly accommodate advances in technology. There are currently laws in place that predate cars, predate the internet, predate electricity. At some point, in some contexts, they will be a hinderance rather than a benefit.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#218

Post by Spivak » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 1:44 PM UTC

umvi wrote: post #208

shimonabi wrote: post #97

Great to see that over 100 years of labour laws won by the workers' movements can't be innovated away in SOME countries.

But does every single way to make money have to provide a living wage with full health benefits, etc.? Seems like you limit types of innovation that could otherwise happen. For example, say you create some kind of trash cleanup/recycling incentive app that pays out some small amount for trash/recyclables picked up and turned in. Soon: everyone is outraged that some poor person can't make a living wage picking up recy…

I agree with this in theory but you have to contend with how people actually engage with these kinds of gig jobs. You can't just legalese "this isn't a full time job" when people are working it as a full time job.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#219

Post by _v7gu » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 1:44 PM UTC

whiddershins wrote: post #196

jacquesm wrote: post #27

Rightly so. The 'gig economy' is abused by quite a few companies to create employment like situations without the required trappings (social security payments, employee protection, hourly minimums and so on). This was long overdue, let's hope it has precedent effect for other companies that abuse the ZZP construct.

Ugh, the unique selling point of working Uber is the flexibility and autonomy. Every driver I talk to says that’s what they love about working it. What is it in us that can’t let people have what they value, just because it is different than what we value?

What does that have to do with employment status? Does the Dutch Commercial Law state that the employees should only work on firm-appointed hours? The hours worked are already logged, the only new responsibilities fall on Uber except for filling a few documents for employment.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#220

Post by lifeisstillgood » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 1:45 PM UTC

Iolaum wrote: post #43

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #38

The thing that interests me here is company valuation. The base idea is that you predict the future profits of a company and NPV that down to today, and that's how much the total share price should be. This of course is tricky, but at some point all the big regulatory arbitrage plays (uber, airbnb) etc were obvious for what they were - and I am not sure they got adjusted. In other words short term competition and PR…

Maybe invest elsewhere? (Assuming qualified choices can be found.)

But that's not the point - I mean if everyone did then the company would get the point. But look at Climate change. FOr decades its been "ignore the tree huggers" - but imagine there was an investment vehicle that was "anti-Exxon" - its hard to stand up at the AGM and say "just tree huggers" when there is a Trillion dollars of bets against you.

I don't think there is any possible such vehicle.

I just kind of wish there was.

A way of allowing the market to take care of externalities.

All we have is regulation, and as a fan of markets, that kind of annoys me. (or rather, I recognise that markets are after all dependant on the existence of government (as opposed to the right-wing style if only governments did not exist markets would take over). And am annoyed that this market has not been created.)