Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It gets even hairier: suppose you are sitting on both apps (or even more) waiting for a ride. Do you get to double-bill two companies for minimum wage hours? IMO this is a no-brainer, the answer is yes, double-bill. The same applies if you get two remote jobs, you bill both.
In many cases this will be a felony, FYI.
Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules
391–400 of 500 posts
Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules
#392Rightly 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.
Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules
#393Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It gets even hairier: suppose you are sitting on both apps (or even more) waiting for a ride. Do you get to double-bill two companies for minimum wage hours? IMO this is a no-brainer, the answer is yes, double-bill. The same applies if you get two remote jobs, you bill both.
> The same applies if you get two remote jobs, you bill both. That's definitely illegal.
Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules
#394Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the conundrum is that either Uber pays for downtime (employee model) or it doesn't (contractor model). It's literally impossible to be actively driving passengers for a solid 40 hours a week while maintaining reasonable work hours. For the model that pays for downtime, it needs to make it up somehow since it wouldn't be able to afford people just sitting around doing nothing in the middle of nowhere. Typicall…
What's blocking them from doing metrics based payment, but with employee like protections? Pay people for the time they mark themselves "available" (regardless of if there's any rides), and require that drivers take anything you give them while they are available. I imagine you could put in a cap and a floor if you really wanted to. You could even allow drivers to reject a certain percentage of rides if you felt like…
Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules
#395Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does Lyft even operate in Holland? Here in the UK Uber drivers have Uber stickers on their cars. I rarely get picked up by a driver without them. What imaginary other company are they working for that would tolerate that? It might not be the case in America, but over here it certainly seems most drivers are working for one company.
Is Uber the only rideshare company available in Europe? In America, every rideshare car has uber and lyft stickers, at a minimum. Just about every driver keeps both apps open and takes rides from wherever they come in.
Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules
#396Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. Of course they're entrepreneurs. They have to own or finance a car. They choose when and where to work and for what company to drive for. They can also work for black car in addition to ride share and can even manage private rides. They have some ability to accept or reject fares. > There's a reason why humanity introduced protections…
That's such a broad definition of entrepreneur that includes 99% of freelancers and self-employed.
> No one is restricting "knowledge workers" from being able to strike a contract.
The job market does, unfortunately.
Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules
#397Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It gets even hairier: suppose you are sitting on both apps (or even more) waiting for a ride. Do you get to double-bill two companies for minimum wage hours? IMO this is a no-brainer, the answer is yes, double-bill. The same applies if you get two remote jobs, you bill both.
In many cases this will be a felony, FYI.
Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules
#398Earlier quoted context omitted.
So do drivers for grubhub/doordash/uber eats. They see the final payout and have the choice to skip the order if it doesn't pay well enough.
Except for the part that the companies will punish them for rejecting orders, and that they can't negotiate the price of the orders nor set any price themselves.
Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules
#399Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can employ drivers and still give them the freedom to accept or decline tides as they wish.
Yes, that would be technically possible. But it will not happen because of how the incentives are set up. If Uber now has to bear the cost of being an employer, it will need to exercise its power over the employee drivers and force them to work.
Re: Uber must employ its drivers, Dutch court rules
#400If this ever happens in the U.S. I won't bother with driving Uber anymore and this would probably put them out of business. The Taxi industry will win back from the disruption that Uber caused. This has nothing to do with worker's rights. No one gave a crap about Taxi driver's work standards and they are/were treated worse than Uber drivers. This is all about the Taxi industry fighting back. 75% of all ride share dri…
A recent study suggests Chicago drivers earn less than minimum wage. > After accounting for driving expenses and self-employment taxes, the average TNP driver in Chicago earns about 3% to 5% less than minimum wage. In 2019, drivers earned $12.30 per hour, or 5% less than the city’s minimum wage of $13 per hour at the time. In 2020, drivers earn slightly above minimum wage, but the hourly rate of pay was artificially…