There is another post on the front page from The CEO of Uber. It seems like the NY times article was written as a way to control the narrative?
Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
371–380 of 781 posts
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#372The consequences of this ruling are probably not going to be known for a while. This is certainly bad for Uber & Lyft insofar as it will greatly increase their operating costs. The question is what effect the ruling will have on drivers. Uber is not a profitable company with fat margins like Google, Facebook, Amazon, Apple or Netflix. I don't see any way for Uber to absorb the increased costs that come with full empl…
I think Uber already chooses when they work and for how long. Uber will have to cap the hours at 8 hrs a day to save on overtime. But the "new employees" can work multiple jobs if they want. Are there employment laws I'm not aware of that require "interviews"? Most fast food works can become employees by just walking in the door, I think.
This is just untrue. Drivers are free to choose when they want to drive.
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#373The consequences of this ruling are probably not going to be known for a while. This is certainly bad for Uber & Lyft insofar as it will greatly increase their operating costs. The question is what effect the ruling will have on drivers. Uber is not a profitable company with fat margins like Google, Facebook, Amazon, Apple or Netflix. I don't see any way for Uber to absorb the increased costs that come with full empl…
>drivers will no longer be able to choose when they work Why? Uber is still free to let them choose if they choose so. >Going forward people who want to drive for Uber will have to interview like any other job Why? Uber would be free to hire without interview. >this will bring a big improvement in quality of life That's the point. >The rest will be out of a job It was deemed that this kind of a job is not worth havin…
To answer your first "Why?" it's because employees have to be paid much more when working over 40 hours / week. Drivers will no longer be able to work an extra 5 hours when they need extra money: They'll have to have a second job. Similarly, there are certain minimum costs associated with each employee above and beyond the costs of a contractor. This may mean Uber is forced to favor drivers who commit to a certain minimum of hours per week, ridding themselves of the "before and after work" driver crowd. The net effect of these two forces means Uber will just be another part-to-full-time job.
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#374I'm sure someone has thought of this, but why don't we have ridehailing apps where the contract literally is between the driver and the passenger(s)? The app can merely suggest a rate but the driver can set whatever price they want. The app takes a very small finder's fee.
What if drivers can't make a living wage using such an app because there is too much supply driving prices down? The app will be crucified for "exploiting drivers"
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#375Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh? The whole point is that the California judiciary is literally saying that legally Uber cannot classify drivers as contractors. So no, they cannot have independent contractors, unless you mean for the operations side of their business, which nobody is talking about so I hope not.
I don't think so... The ruling is that the relationship as it is in employment. The test is: A) the worker is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of the work and in fact; and B) the worker performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business; and C) the worker is customarily engag…
Right, but the issue is that there doesn't seem to be any clear way Uber as an entity with the business model that it has (make an app that connects drivers with riders, take a portion of proceeds) can ever have drivers that are contractors.
Said another way, what could Uber change from their current policies that would pass ABC if they don't at the minute?
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
not at the same time, you can't, unless you're talking about a taco bell/kfc joint.
not at the same time, you can't Just as a ride hailing driver can't simultaneously have an Uber and a Lyft passenger in his car. What's your point?
He's not making one.
You can be an employee of multiple companies at once. Many people are.
You just generally don't get paid by multiple companies for the same period of time if you are paid hourly wages.
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#377Earlier quoted context omitted.
not at the same time, you can't, unless you're talking about a taco bell/kfc joint.
not at the same time, you can't Just as a ride hailing driver can't simultaneously have an Uber and a Lyft passenger in his car. What's your point?
A lyft driver can have the uber and lyft apps on at the same time during the phase when you don't have a passenger in the car. This is basic driver strategy 101. It's generally good etiquette to turn it off when you get pinged for a passenger, but that doesn't always happen[0], and for sure I have seen drivers flip the other one back on towards the end of their ride. This is critical question for employment law because: how do you calculate minimum wage hours?
[0] I did this once, uber had a really stupid and un-thought-out halloween weekend bonus on a weekend where halloween fell on a friday night (people don't party hard on saturday night of a halloween weekend like that), and pink mustache copied with their own equally asinine bonus. So I went out to a place within the service area where I knew I would not get very many uber or lyft rides, and left both apps on for hours while reading inside a Denny's. I did happen to get ONE ride, and I left the other service on to rack up bonus time on it. I was definitely nervous as hell though, which in retrospect, was unnecessary.
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#378From AB5 (and yes, I posted this in another topic today, but few here seem to know it.)
...shall be considered an employee unless the hiring entity demonstrates that all of the following conditions are satisfied:
(1) The person is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of the work and in fact.
(2) The person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business.
(3) The person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as that involved in the work performed.
#2 is the key issue for Uber. Uber claims to be merely a booking agent, not a ride service. This is not believed by their customers, drivers, or the courts. Nor is it the message on Uber's web site, which says "Sign Up to Ride - Reliable rides in minutes". Uber is in the taxi business.
Uber has been trying to get around #1 by allowing drivers a bit more flexibility. A tiny bit. Not too much.
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#379Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm afraid you're repeating Uber's favorite talking point, which is that everyone should respect the worker's decision to be an employee or contractor. Nobody disputes that Uber can have employees or contractors (or both), or that drivers should, in principle, be able to choose what status they hold. The problem is that Uber currently exerts so much control over its "independent contractor" relationships that they ha…
The fact that it's Uber's talking point doesn't make it any less true. If rideshare drivers are employees, then there's going to be fixed overhead costs of hiring employees and drivers will not be able to set their own hours. The rideshare company would not recoup the costs of benefits for drivers that drive less than a certain number of hours per month, and so drivers would have to be required to work at least that…
Employees can set their own hours. White collar employees do it all the time...
It's up to the employer what freedoms they allow. Generally, like with existing businesses, it would probably utilize a shift assignment system, where employees get assigned shifts but can swap them with other employees.
Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
The argument which won was not that there is some legal reason Uber can’t have both independent contractors and employees, but rather that the relationship between Uber and it’s drivers is de facto employment and should therefore be subject to employment law.
Huh? The whole point is that the California judiciary is literally saying that legally Uber cannot classify drivers as contractors. So no, they cannot have independent contractors, unless you mean for the operations side of their business, which nobody is talking about so I hope not.
There's correct, under CA law Uber would need to restructure its entire business model if it wants to treat drivers as contractors. (The ABC test in the other reply was codified into CA law.)