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

Uber: Disability Laws Don’t Apply to Us

thedailybeast.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 212 posts

Re: Uber: Disability Laws Don’t Apply to Us

#21

Post by sago »

MrSourz wrote: post #7

I think I understand Uber's stance here. From a business perspective their drivers are all independent contractors. This is an important part of the discussion because if they start telling them what the can and cannot do during their time then they start to look more and more like employees (something they absolutely do not want). An example of this are the popularly discussed drivers that run jewellery or other bus…

I suspect you've not seen a copy of the Terms for Uber drivers. They provide a lot of instructions, on a lot of issues, most of them far less legally crucial than the ADA. Down to what to say to passengers.

There will always be excuses, but "we'll look like an employer, therefore disabled people can go fish" is pretty ignoble.

Re: Uber: Disability Laws Don’t Apply to Us

#22

Post by chimeracoder »

MrSourz wrote: post #7

I think I understand Uber's stance here. From a business perspective their drivers are all independent contractors. This is an important part of the discussion because if they start telling them what the can and cannot do during their time then they start to look more and more like employees (something they absolutely do not want). An example of this are the popularly discussed drivers that run jewellery or other bus…

Engaging in litigation claiming you don't have to follow the ADA simply because you don't want to deal with the tax implications of doing so is unbelievably low.

> if they start telling them what the can and cannot do during their time then they start to look more and more like employees (something they absolutely do not want)

Uber may not want it, but their drivers are undeniably employees, not contractors.

Whenever I see this discussed, people bring up that Uber satisfies some of the criteria for being employees but not others. However, that's not the way the IRS works. To the IRS, those criteria are all sufficient, not necessary - Uber doesn't need to satisfy all of them in order for the IRS to consider them to be employees.

Re: Uber: Disability Laws Don’t Apply to Us

#23

Post by jacquesm »

aikah wrote: post #10

> but Uber claims that because it’s a technology company, not a transportation service, it doesn’t fall under the ADA’s jurisdiction. What the ? Come on ,They don't get to decide what law they should follow. Or maybe they know that all these lawsuits cost them less than having to respect the law, I don't know. All I can say is that Uber displays an unbelievable level of arrogance.

> Come on ,They don't get to decide what law they should follow.

That's been Uber's stance from day 1.

Re: Uber: Disability Laws Don’t Apply to Us

#24

Post by malka »

aikah wrote: post #10

> but Uber claims that because it’s a technology company, not a transportation service, it doesn’t fall under the ADA’s jurisdiction. What the ? Come on ,They don't get to decide what law they should follow. Or maybe they know that all these lawsuits cost them less than having to respect the law, I don't know. All I can say is that Uber displays an unbelievable level of arrogance.

Uber may not fall under ADA. Its drivers are. Sue the individual drivers.

Re: Uber: Disability Laws Don’t Apply to Us

#25

Post by droopyEyelids »

MrSourz wrote: post #7

I think I understand Uber's stance here. From a business perspective their drivers are all independent contractors. This is an important part of the discussion because if they start telling them what the can and cannot do during their time then they start to look more and more like employees (something they absolutely do not want). An example of this are the popularly discussed drivers that run jewellery or other bus…

I think you're missing Uber's actual concerns.

Uber has built its business skirting the laws on taxis and other transportation companies-- exploiting a loophole.

If the ADA law gets applied to them, it'll be a legal precedent for treating them like every other transportation company. So now they have to fight it- not because they care about people with wheelchairs, but because it's an existential threat to the foundation of their business.

What makes the situation interesting is that Uber could have avoided this whole fiasco by being ethical in the beginning, and making "you have to help people with disabilities" a part of their new-driver training. Then this would never have become a legal issue, and they wouldn't have the public shame of fighting against people with disabilities, or the threat to the core of their business.

Re: Uber: Disability Laws Don’t Apply to Us

#26

Post by MrSourz »

ceejayoz wrote: post #17
MrSourz wrote: post #7

I think I understand Uber's stance here. From a business perspective their drivers are all independent contractors. This is an important part of the discussion because if they start telling them what the can and cannot do during their time then they start to look more and more like employees (something they absolutely do not want). An example of this are the popularly discussed drivers that run jewellery or other bus…

Surely I can tell a web developer contractor they can't build insecure/shitty code without turning them into an employee? They tell their drivers all sorts of instructions already - turn down tips, offer water, be courteous, etc.

You certainly can advise your contractors. You can stipulate in your contract that the work must be completed in a certain way. As this relates to uber I'm sure that they tell all their drivers to not break the law (covers speeding, running red lights, and also discrimination).

The onus in this case is on the users to out the drivers to Uber through the review system. Maybe they need a submit button on the review page that says 'my driver broke the law'.

Re: Uber: Disability Laws Don’t Apply to Us

#27

Post by kaolinite »

This really saddens me. I used to love Uber, it was one of my favourite companies. I remember when I first used it - I'd gone down to London and was going to try UberLux out, just for the one trip. I ended up using it about four times that day, even though it was far more expensive than a taxi. It was incredible and worth every penny because unlike taxis, Uber was professional[1]. The driver was polite, you got a bottle of water to drink and there was stuff to read too (and not rubbish either, quality stuff like the FT).

For a while, it seemed like Uber was about the high-end - as Travis himself said, he created Uber to have a more "baller" way to travel around San Francisco - but then they started to care more and more about being seen as affordable and UberX is now clearly the company's top priority. And as prices drop and margins are squeezed, articles like this are the end result. People will complain that luxury isn't important (and they might be right) but Uber had a really good service that was different. Now they're just like all the other ride sharing companies.

I really, really wish they would shut down UberX. I know they won't. But I want to love Uber again - but with all of these stories, almost all regarding UberX drivers - I feel obnoxious if I use them. I don't want to support them.

Love the service, hate the company.

[1] I was recently in a taxi where the taxi driver said a number of very racist things, directly insulted me, my fellow passenger and pretty much anyone he came into contact with during the ride (other cars, pedestrians, etc) and swore repeatedly. This isn't the first time I've experienced this (although it was the worst). I'm somewhat shy and find taxis to be, on occasion, somewhat intimidating. I've never felt that way in an Uber.

Re: Uber: Disability Laws Don’t Apply to Us

#28

Post by chimeracoder »

marknutter wrote: post #18
afandian wrote: post #5

I don't know what people expected from an organisation set up for the prime purpose of avoiding regulation.

A better service at a cheaper rate.

> A better service at a cheaper rate

...While replicating all of the problems the regulation was created to address in the first place.

Re: Uber: Disability Laws Don’t Apply to Us

#29

Post by Thriptic »

eire1130 wrote: post #11

It's really not that hard to "do the right thing." Yet they have to go out their way to be dicks about it.

It depends on how you define doing the right thing. If you mean telling drivers to be accomodating of passengers with disabilities, then yes I agree. If you mean fielding an entire discrete service of vehicles across the world to service a small, non uniformally distributed number of users without actually employing their drivers; that's a bit harder. I'm not saying that Uber shouldn't deploy such a discrete service, but I'm not sure it's fair to say that ADA compliance in this context is cheap or easy.
Post reply on HN