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

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#301

Post by yawaworht1978 » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 3:25 PM UTC

fallingknife wrote: post #171

capableweb wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone is abusing everything. We've seen time and time again companies abusing employees with hard work, long schedules, unsafe environments and skimping on safety, which is why we have laws for safe working environments now. Sometimes work is physically hard, and the effect of that type of work usually doesn't show until you've done it for a longer time. So not only should you get money for the time and effort you…

That's not so much an effect of years of hard work as it is that as you get older your capacity for hard work declines. Also we already have government pensions. So why should a company have to provide them? The economic effect of this is that workers have to wait years for some of their pay instead of getting it right now.

As programmers or office based workforce, the worst hazards might be carpal tunnel syndrome, bad back from bad posture and maybe an upset stomach from a bad coffee.

I have known plenty of young guys in the UK who went on these fly in fly out jobs on gas or oil platforms in Australia, as it's a relatively uncomplicated way to get a well paid job (the only good thing about it) due to easy access to Australia, being commonwealth etc. Some of them turned into literal cripples within 2-3 years, others half cripples requiring re education or placement in a less physically demanding job. It's not the same doing this once for a weekend and then classify it as "not so hard" and go out there, work in 100 deg heat or sub freezing temperatures every day, rain, wind etc. It grinds down a body slowly.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#302

Post by etchalon » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 3:25 PM UTC

boplicity wrote: post #261

d0gsg0w00f wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet employers are wishing they never got involved in benefits. Now they're just the governments execution arm for social programs and they're stuck forever. Looking back, the only reason employers started getting involved in Healthcare was because the 1942 Stabilization Act restricted them from raising wages and they had to come up with a more creative way of competing for talent. Now the ACA forces companies to pr…

I wish more people realized how anti-capitalist the current healthcare system is in the U.S. If you want to encourage business, then remove barriers. Governments should be taking care of healthcare, not businesses. Businesses should be focused on the core work they do: Running their business. Not on providing health care. (Same goes, really, for childcare, transportation, and similar benefits that large employers som…

Completely agree. Universal healthcare would empower a lot of entrepreneurs, make it easier to attract talent for smaller companies, and free me of a completely ridiculous amount of paperwork and oversight each year. If someone told me, as a business, I could just pay a tax and know my employees had access to the same quality of care as everyone else, I'd sign up in a heart beat.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#303

Post by alkonaut » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 3:27 PM UTC

mrsuprawsm wrote: post #222

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?

Whenever I order an Uber in NL, I seem to get a car that is a licensed taxi. Usually they have a taxi sign on top of the car, and always have blue license plates (which you can only get if you are a taxi). So, I think that the workaround must have been that they actually employ licensed taxi drivers. This is, however, only speculation.

This is 100% the case in Sweden. Since Uber is a ride service/taxi they are just like any other taxi company, of which there are hundreds (Taxi has one simple definition and it's to offer rides to the public for money). Since there are no artifical caps on number of taxis such as medallions, all that's required to run a taxi is to have a special drivers' license and a certified vehicle.

So all Uber drivers are taxi drivers and all Uber vehicles are taxi vehicles. Simple.

If Uber tried to somehow do taxi services without their drivers having taxi drivers licenses or their cars being registred taxi cars, they'd be laughed at.

Everything is really really simple once there is no taxi monopoly or medallion system.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#304

Post by alkonaut » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 3:29 PM UTC

Grimm1 wrote: post #225

Legitimate question, will Uber shut down it's Dutch operations now? Will this cost them more money than it's worth to operate there, and would they shutdown to send a message to other nations about there intent should similar rulings be made? Uber's margins have always been super thin, I would imagine this makes them squarely unprofitable in the Dutch market.

If other taxi companies can operate under these terms then so can Uber. The margins are thin for other taxi companies too.

The question is perhaps: is Uber interested in being just another taxi company, withut much of a disruptive edge?

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#305

Post by kwonkicker » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 3:29 PM UTC

I am torn on this issue, maybe I don't see the whole picture. Uber was never meant to be a taxi company. It was a means for people with cars to share their gas expenses. I don't know how could they ever prevent this gig from becoming a full-time job for most drivers, but I think forcing employment is not a solution.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#306

Post by d0gsg0w00f » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 3:29 PM UTC

etchalon wrote: post #298

d0gsg0w00f wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bet employers are wishing they never got involved in benefits. Now they're just the governments execution arm for social programs and they're stuck forever. Looking back, the only reason employers started getting involved in Healthcare was because the 1942 Stabilization Act restricted them from raising wages and they had to come up with a more creative way of competing for talent. Now the ACA forces companies to pr…

Yes, as a business owner, I'm very upset that I have to "follow the law". Things would be so much easier if I didn't.

My point is that it didn't used to be a law. Why can't the government enforce it's own social program and let businesses focus on their primary goal instead of healthcare compliance.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#307

Post by Ansil849 » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 3:30 PM UTC

goodpoint wrote: post #254

belter wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some consequences. If they will be hired as employees it will be first with a temporary contract. Since there is a limitation to renewal of fixed term contracts, after a certain period the employment is seen as an indefinite employment contract rather than a new fixed term agreement. Meaning then they could not be fired something Uber will not want. The limit is 3 years or 3 contract renewals: https://www.t…

> they really are freelancers/entrepreneurs not employees Taxi drivers are not knowledge workers, or artists and clearly not entrepreneurs. They are easily replaceable "cogs in the machine", like many non-specialised factory workers, office clerks, retail employees and so on. There's a reason why humanity introduced protections for vulnerable workers in almost every society.

> Taxi drivers are not knowledge workers, or artists and clearly not entrepreneurs.

> They are easily replaceable "cogs in the machine", like many non-specialised factory workers, office clerks, retail employees and so on.

> There's a reason why humanity introduced protections for vulnerable workers in almost every society.

I appreciate the point you're making, but I also think you are grossly undervaluing the specialisation of cab drivers.

In the UK, the Knowledge [1] is a notoriously arduous exam which certainly makes cab drivers anything but "replaceable 'cogs in the machine'".

In fact, I think the fact that people view these jobs as being replaceable is what leads to their deterioration. Someone who has a GPS but no innate and learned knowledge of the terrain does not provide a service comparable to someone who has a thorough understanding of the domain. And the more people rely on the former, the more they think that that's all there is to it, and so it becomes a race to the bottom of sorts.

I'm not sure if I'm articulating this fully, but basically: jobs such as cab driving require specialisation and skill to be done well, but are often replaced by those without that skill doing freelance driving, which leads to a deterioration of expected service, and people ultimately thinking that the workers are all interchangeable.

[1] https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/taxis-and-private-hire/licensing...

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#308

Post by campl3r » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 3:32 PM UTC

axkdev wrote: post #75

I hope über goes bankrupt and we forget about all of this insanity. In Germany where I live the taxi service is amassing, at least in my city can't say for whole country. They are quick clean the drivers are professionals and not some randos who will break rules to get there faster or drive so insanely that you want to puke. They know the city by heart and don't use navigators. Due to being professionals they are com…

that has not been my experience. As a German having used taxis in many German cities I do prefer taking an US Uber over any German taxi every time.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#309

Post by WJW » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 3:32 PM UTC

devcpp wrote: post #279

WJW wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Welcome to society. I'm not sure where you live but in every country I know of there are plenty of things you can't do with your car and/or your free time.

That doesn't harm others? Like what?

Not harming others is a condition you just added to the argument, and it is also a condition that Uber does not meet in the eyes of Dutch law. By not paying taxes on the wages of their drivers, Uber shifts the costs for the healthcare, pensions and general public services (dikes, fire services, etc etc) of those drivers onto the rest of society, thereby harming all those companies and citizens that do pay their taxes as required.

Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules

#310

Post by safog » Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 3:35 PM UTC

BLanen wrote: post #285

Good. Uber is a unsustainable business built employee exploitation to effectively pay them less than minimum wage while flouting "freedom" to bait the people in the worst situations. This was known from the start. Meanwhile subsidising rides with investor-cash to effectively bait-and-switch society. The recent-ish price hikes are only a start. Anyone repeating their PR should be ashamed. "gigs" are cancer or wait, th…

Yes, clearly you're a smart one and can see things clearly and none of the poor Uber drivers are smart enough to figure it out.

Get over yourself.