Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#351

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 6:54 PM UTC

kube-system wrote: post #253

fallingknife wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The driver absolutely can negotiate, but Uber is not under any obligation to compromise. The following is a perfectly valid negotiation: company: Our payment terms are ABC. contractor: Can we do XYZ instead? company: Sorry, but we are not willing to do XYZ. It will need to be ABC, can you accept that? contractor: OK You are mistaking the right of the contractor to negotiate with an obligation on the company to conced…

Does Uber communicate ABC entirely before a driver accepts? I have not used the app as a driver, but the screenshots I've seen suggest they might not?

[deleted]

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#352

Post by namdnay » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 6:55 PM UTC

emteycz wrote: post #337

baq wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

only being able to accept or refuse is hardly negotiation - and if you refuse enough times, they kick you, so you can't really refuse.

Consider that employee can't negotiate at all - you do what your boss tells you or you are fired, even in Europe - not performing assigned work is specifically written in the law as fireable offense. Accepting or declining terms certainly is negotiation, even if it seems limited. It's not true that you can't refuse to ride! I have driven many Uber rides as driver (and about 100x more as a passenger) - what will get y…

> Accepting or declining terms certainly is negotiation, even if it seems limited [...] what will get you kicked out is marking yourself available and then declining rides

There is a contradiction here... Keep in mind that Uber have always explicitly stated that they are just a platform to connect drivers with passengers. So the negotiation (even if it is just accepting or declining terms) must happen between the driver and the customer - i.e. every new passenger.

Except that, as you point out, Uber punishes drivers who negotiate in this way! The driver isn't even allowed to refuse customers. It's as if you told your agent "ok I'm open to work", they reply "there's a job 150 miles away, you need to be there at 6am every morning", and you weren't allowed to decline!

So we started with very little negotiation power (the "contractor" can say yes or no to the terms predefined by the platform), and then saw this reduced even more when the platform prevents "contractors" from negotiating in this way with each customer - clearly they are a contractor no more

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#353

Post by TulliusCicero » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 7:00 PM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #303

TulliusCicero wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Food delivery is labor intensive. 20-30% is probably unreasonably high for a big order, but if you're only ordering a couple of dishes that percentage probably makes sense.

Food delivery seems like the sort of thing that should be a set/tiered price. When I last used grocery delivery years ago that's how it worked.

It should probably be both, since the amount of space a deliveryperson has can be limited (especially those on bikes).

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#354

Post by emteycz » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 7:04 PM UTC

namdnay wrote: post #352

emteycz wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider that employee can't negotiate at all - you do what your boss tells you or you are fired, even in Europe - not performing assigned work is specifically written in the law as fireable offense. Accepting or declining terms certainly is negotiation, even if it seems limited. It's not true that you can't refuse to ride! I have driven many Uber rides as driver (and about 100x more as a passenger) - what will get y…

> Accepting or declining terms certainly is negotiation, even if it seems limited [...] what will get you kicked out is marking yourself available and then declining rides There is a contradiction here... Keep in mind that Uber have always explicitly stated that they are just a platform to connect drivers with passengers . So the negotiation (even if it is just accepting or declining terms) must happen between the dr…

> The driver isn't even allowed to refuse customers.

As I said, you are allowed to refuse customers - simply turn off your availability. You are not allowed to decline rides when you've marked yourself available, just as IT contractors aren't allowed to decline jobs after they announce availability.

It's not true that platforms must allow direct provider-customer negotiation or it's employment. Be careful with this, because most of B2B world is running on middlemen similar to Uber (just without an app) - you might suddenly make everyone an employee!

> "there's a job 150 miles away, you need to be there at 6am every morning", and you weren't allowed to decline!

This is totally false in case of Uber. You can be anywhere in a city-wide zone, you're free to turn on your availability at any time you wish, and you can turn it off at any time you wish, and you can stay offline for as long as you wish - all of this is impossible for employees.

> clearly they are a contractor no more

How so? Are they using their own equipment? Yes. Are they defining their own working hours and place of work? Yes. Are they able to work or not work whenever they choose? Yes. Are they paid per job and not per hour/month/year? Yes.

Please tell me, who is a contractor in your world? Seems like absolutely no one would fall into your criteria. Negotiation never was the defining feature of a contractor, only one of many criteria, and many contractors don't have any ability to negotiate at all (due to long term contracts based on e.g. volume)! And still, in case of Uber there is negotiation, you can decline to work if you don't like the terms, unlike employees.

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#355

Post by prepend » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 7:17 PM UTC

1_person wrote: post #313

prepend wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s just too hard to organize drivers and delivery. I’ve never experienced a restaurant where their own delivery drivers are as fast, efficient, smart as Uber/etc. I’d rather just go pick it up myself than use restaurant delivery. I’m sure there may be exceptions somewhere, but even in Manhattan the deliveries that work for the restaurant sucked. I think it’s that there’s no simple feedback loop. An example…

Have you... actually ordered from a restaurant that's done self-delivery for more than 5 minutes? I've never, not even once, seen the same driver from one of these services. This is a huge problem, because every mapping service directs them to an automated exit-only gate that nobody anywhere has the power to open for them -- certainly not if they just sit there for 5 minutes helplessly then chuck it out the window an…

> Have you... actually ordered from a restaurant that's done self-delivery for more than 5 minutes?

Yes, of course. Aside from the example I gave where I used their self-delivery for 10 years before switching to this new gen.

And I suppose I’ve ordered from about 500 self-delivery restaurants, although I don’t keep a log.

It sounds like you’ve had some bad experiences and they aren’t like mine. I have had really bad experiences with doordash and grubhub where they wouldn’t fix problems, but Uber is about 75% responsive that is so much better than self-delivery.

From first principles it seems like self-delivery can’t compete unless they are really into delivery. Because they can’t scale well beyond their drivers on hand and it’s not possible for them to send out 10 orders at once, etc

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#356

Post by cactus2093 » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 7:26 PM UTC

dgellow wrote: post #144

fallingknife wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn't make sense to me. I did some contract work a couple years ago and: 1. The company set the hourly rate which meant they dictated how much I could earn 2. The company set the contract terms 3. The company told me what features to build and could penalize me if I decided not to build some 4. The company could evaluate my performance any way they wanted and terminate the contract at any time for no cause If…

1. As a contractor I negotiate my rates with the companies I work with. Uber drivers cannot do this. 2. I also negotiate contract terms. Uber drivers cannot do this. 3. Uber drivers are penalized for not taking rides, which is more akin to refusing a paid opportunity than building a feature. Again as a contractor I do negotiate the work I can and want to do. 4. For this point I agree with you. I can also terminate th…

I don't get why you're so focused on the negotiation part. I'm guessing your services happen to be very in demand, which is great and gives you the ability to successfully negotiate. There are lots of other contractors that fail to negotiate and end up accepting a client's first offer. Are they not actually contractors?

For #3, drivers may be penalized for being logged in and rejecting rides (though even that may have changed recently). But that is more akin to missing a deadline or not being available at an agreed upon time, something which any contractor might be penalized for. Uber drivers are always free to just decide not to log in and work at all and aren't penalized for that.

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#357

Post by namdnay » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 7:33 PM UTC

emteycz wrote: post #354

namdnay wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Accepting or declining terms certainly is negotiation, even if it seems limited [...] what will get you kicked out is marking yourself available and then declining rides There is a contradiction here... Keep in mind that Uber have always explicitly stated that they are just a platform to connect drivers with passengers . So the negotiation (even if it is just accepting or declining terms) must happen between the dr…

> The driver isn't even allowed to refuse customers. As I said, you are allowed to refuse customers - simply turn off your availability. You are not allowed to decline rides when you've marked yourself available, just as IT contractors aren't allowed to decline jobs after they announce availability. It's not true that platforms must allow direct provider-customer negotiation or it's employment. Be careful with this,…

> IT contractors aren't allowed to decline jobs after they announce availability

I don't get this - I've done a bit of consulting and it didn't work like you describe. A client reaches out to you (either directly or through an agency), they describe the mission, you say yes or no, negotiate the rate and bingo. Exactly like a plumber.

What system are you describing?

> who is a contractor in your world?

Plumbers, independent building contractors, software contractors, corporate trainers - there are lots of contractors out there. The general rule is that they accept no job security in exchange for higher rates than the equivalent salaried position (e.g. an independent plumber makes 2x what a salaried plumber does, however if they get ill or break a leg they are in trouble..). This for me is the main test that shows Uber isn't contracting - Uber drivers make the same or less than salaried taxi drivers!

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#358

Post by DanBC » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 7:37 PM UTC

FeepingCreature wrote: post #256

Jochim wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same could be said for child labour or health and safety regulation. If a child is desperate enough to work why shouldn't we let them? Why don't we allow workers to choose to work for companies that put their wellbeing at risk? The reason is that it ends up not being a choice of the worker at all, incentives align in such a way that these are no longer an "option" but instead a replacement of existing work/choice…

I mean, I think there's two possible situations, depending on whether something is due to worker choice or company choice. I agree that in a situation where everyone is offering shitty conditions, outlawing shitty conditions makes sense. But in a situation where some companies offer shitty conditions, and lots of people decide to go away from their existing companies and work for the shitty companies , then you have…

> and lots of people decide to go away from their existing companies and work for the shitty companies, then you have to at least entertain the notion that you were wrong about what makes a job shitty

There's a lot of churn in the job market, so people go in and out of work frequently. They may spend a few weeks or months claiming unemployment benefits. In the UK that would be Universal Credit, and some people claiming UC were forced into working zero hour contracts for companies like Uber by the DWP.

For many people it's not a choice.

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#359

Post by sildur » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 7:40 PM UTC

roel_v wrote: post #40

habosa wrote: post #10

Really interested to see what this does to Deliveroo. I live in central London on a pretty busy street and it's really wild how many Deliveroo drivers there are. In front of most of the popular takeaway restaurants there are 3-5 drivers waiting at any given time. The increase in delivery and decrease in normal foot traffic during the pandemic has made this really stick out. Deliveroo already totally robs these restau…

I feel really bad for small restaurant owners. These large delivery companies totally take over their internet marketing too, registering a domain like ' - .com' and when you go to that website, you really have to pay attention to see that this is not the 'official' restaurant website and if you order through there, it's costing the restaurant a lot of money that they wouldn't miss out on if you'd order through their…

Could you please tell me who is registering these domains? I'm honestly interested, I don't want to use the services of such crooks.

Re: Uber drivers are workers not self employed, Supreme Court rules

#360

Post by DanBC » Fri, Feb 19, 2021, 7:42 PM UTC

wonderwonder wrote: post #332

hrktb wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the argument is less to stop doing the 4 above, than to accept it's a employer/employee relationship and behave accordingly. If there is actual value in the service, they should be able to adjust to the decision.

If its a generic employer/employee relationship then should uber not require 40 hours a week per driver? I am not opposed to that but it does kill the gig concept of the job. It will drastically remove the ability of people to just pick up shifts on the fly. Uber is currently very much a loss generating company, adding additional cost to their business plan will accelerate that. If they go out of business, even if ju…

Uber is cheaper because they're avoiding tax.

When Uber claims that they do not employ the drivers they're also saying that the drivers (as independent businesses) are responsible for charging VAT and paying that to HMRC. You only have to register for VAT if your vattable income exceeds £85,000 per year, so most drivers haven't registered for or charged VAT.