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

US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 212 posts

Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors

#11

Post by midoridensha »

yieldcrv wrote: post #10

Isn't this debate largely a false dilemma? Its obvious to me that an additional category is prudent, or that people besides employees should have access to subsidized health care premiums and some form of paid sick leave. that doesnt have to come from the employer and that doesnt have to mean that worker flexibility is curbed. contractors can already do retirement benefits plans such as the 401k plan, running your ow…

>or that people besides employees should have access to subsidized health care premiums and some form of paid sick leave.

Or perhaps there should be a national health insurance that all citizens could have by default?

Oh wait, this is the United States, so that'll never happen.

Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors

#12

Post by doktorhladnjak »

yieldcrv wrote: post #10

Isn't this debate largely a false dilemma? Its obvious to me that an additional category is prudent, or that people besides employees should have access to subsidized health care premiums and some form of paid sick leave. that doesnt have to come from the employer and that doesnt have to mean that worker flexibility is curbed. contractors can already do retirement benefits plans such as the 401k plan, running your ow…

The UK has a “worker” [0] classification between employee and true independent contractor. It provides protections like minimum wage and time off while preserving freedom about when and how someone works. It seems like it would fit this case well, but I doubt it will ever happen. Unions are the major force pushing for gig workers to be classified as employees because they’d be able to unionize.

[0] https://www.gov.uk/employment-status/worker

Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors

#13

Post by 3np »

doktorhladnjak wrote: post #12
yieldcrv wrote: post #10

Isn't this debate largely a false dilemma? Its obvious to me that an additional category is prudent, or that people besides employees should have access to subsidized health care premiums and some form of paid sick leave. that doesnt have to come from the employer and that doesnt have to mean that worker flexibility is curbed. contractors can already do retirement benefits plans such as the 401k plan, running your ow…

The UK has a “worker” [0] classification between employee and true independent contractor. It provides protections like minimum wage and time off while preserving freedom about when and how someone works. It seems like it would fit this case well, but I doubt it will ever happen. Unions are the major force pushing for gig workers to be classified as employees because they’d be able to unionize. [0] https://www.gov.uk…

I initially found the choice of the word "worker" in the headline curious but with this context it makes sense coming from the BBC. Thanks.

Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors

#14

Post by SllX »

karmasimida wrote: post #5
NoZebra120vClip wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lawmakers cannot change if they so choose... They can modify it, You know here all this time I thought that "modify" is a synonym of "change". So can lawmakers modify it or can they not modify it?

I read modifying it requires like super super majority like over 80% of approval from senate legislature, effectively it couldnt be done So it is yes and no i guess, in theory yes, in practice better forget about it. This is state constitution, it isnt meant to be modified as someone pleases

Our State Constitution is modified frequently at the ballot box.

This one amendment to the law is just more difficult to amend than all the rest of the Constitution because it was designed specifically to be extremely difficult verging on impossible to amend but not technically impossible to amend as part of its text; and voters approved it with a far lower threshold than it would take for the legislature to modify it.

Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors

#15

Post by arlort »

akira2501 wrote: post #3
CSMastermind wrote: post #2

https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/A163655.PDF ^ Actual court ruling which is linked in the article itself. I find the article's headline misleading. The court ruled that a proposition that was passed by voters in California which classified these drivers as contractors was mostly constitutional and would be allowed to have the effect of law, noting that California's legislative branch was free to change th…

Lawmakers cannot change if they so choose. Propositions amend the constitution of California. They can modify it, but they have to honor the rule itself and cannot simply remove it or abrogate it through this alteration. > Legislature can amend Proposition 22’s provisions with a statute passed by a seven-eighths majority in both houses, so long as the statute is “consistent with, and furthers the purpose of,” the ini…

> passed by a seven-eighths majority in both houses

Holy mother of supermajorities ...

What's the procedure for reversing a ballot measure? Can only be done via a different ballot measure?

Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors

#16

Post by SllX »

uoaei wrote: post #8
CSMastermind wrote: post #2

https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/A163655.PDF ^ Actual court ruling which is linked in the article itself. I find the article's headline misleading. The court ruled that a proposition that was passed by voters in California which classified these drivers as contractors was mostly constitutional and would be allowed to have the effect of law, noting that California's legislative branch was free to change th…

[flagged]

> At what point does blatant advertising/propaganda meaningfully undermine human agency?

Regularly and governments live and die on their ability to advertise their policies and propagate their message in a convincing fashion. There were plenty of us that didn’t need to be advertised to to put a bullet through AB5’s heart in a manner humiliating to the Bill’s chief sponsor despite the deficiencies in Prop 22 for getting the entire job done, so do you want to tell me why my vote should be nullified other than you disagree with the outcome? In whichever way campaigning influenced the outcome, the vote was the vote and the vote followed the laws of California and the United States.

Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors

#17

Post by sourcecodeplz »

In Europe, you can't drive for Uber or deliver food without a standard work contract which includes: healthcare, pension, payroll and income taxes.

Drivers here PAY private companies a weekly amount in order to work for Uber et all (to have that contract). Uber et all work with these companies only, not individuals.

Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors

#18

Post by [deleted] »

arlort wrote: post #15
akira2501 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lawmakers cannot change if they so choose. Propositions amend the constitution of California. They can modify it, but they have to honor the rule itself and cannot simply remove it or abrogate it through this alteration. > Legislature can amend Proposition 22’s provisions with a statute passed by a seven-eighths majority in both houses, so long as the statute is “consistent with, and furthers the purpose of,” the ini…

> passed by a seven-eighths majority in both houses Holy mother of supermajorities ... What's the procedure for reversing a ballot measure? Can only be done via a different ballot measure?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN