Update on AB5

Post by shkkmo » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 11:11 PM UTC

stilist wrote: post #181

dymk wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FTA: > But just because the test is hard does not mean we will not be able to pass it. In fact, several previous rulings have found that drivers’ work is outside the usual course of Uber’s business, which is serving as a technology platform for several different types of digital marketplaces. Previous rulings have found his statement to be accurate. So you don't have to take his word for it, you can take a judge's.

Those rulings were made without the context of the new law, though, so the results may be different.

Post by darkwizard42 » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 11:14 PM UTC

dzader wrote: post #170

basch wrote: post #121

I think there is more truth to their argument than people are giving them credit for. It seems like an in bad faith perspective to not give their claim some credence. It makes YOUR argument stronger to first make the best version of Ubers argument before rebutting it. Does it make me a Microsoft employee if I use Outlook to conduct business? Does it make me an Ebay employee if I sell things through ebay? Until Uber e…

> Does it make me a Microsoft employee if I use Outlook to conduct business? If Microsoft is the one paying you, and dictating how you use Outlook, what you can say, who you talk to you - then yes, it does.

Post by azylman » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 11:14 PM UTC

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #188

azylman wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming there's unlimited demand for employees by McD's... which, in point of fact, is absolutely not the case.

It was a single example of a low-skilled job. The generalized point is that you can go to any employer looking for low-skilled labor. There's high transferability between these sort of jobs.

Post by darkwizard42 » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 11:16 PM UTC

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #88

ajkjk wrote: post #17

I feel like it's pretty clear that gig economy jobs don't neatly fit in either of the existing categories of workers: they're not quite employees (you can clearly work or not work whenever you want) or contractors (you clearly have very little negotiating power or information in choosing your work or guaranteeing your wages). Attempts to munge them into one of those categories are just doomed; a new category is neede…

Ridesharing companies, Labor, and the California legislature missed an opportunity to identify a third type of employee. The truth is always somewhere in the middle, and the most objective truth (to me) suggests that rideshare drivers honestly sit somewhere between employees and contractors. The politics of what has occurred here is probably the pendulum swinging too far, but in the right direction: the classificatio…

Post by spookthesunset » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 11:18 PM UTC

compiler-guy wrote: post #176

cortesoft wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do feel that driver's being able to work for multiple ride sharing companies at the same time does make it a bit different from a normal job. A majority of drivers have both Lyft and uber enabled at the same time.... so are they employees of both? How should benefits be calculated? If I am an employee of a company, they are probably not going to let me work for a competitor while I am on the clock with them.

This is somewhat true for higher level jobs, but once you hit retail, and blue collar jobs generally, it stops being true. McDonalds doesn't care if I also work at Burger King. Target doesn't care if I also work at WalMart. A plumber is generally fine if their assistant also works for another one. All of this is subject to still doing the first job satisfactorially, of course.