> drivers’ work is outside the usual course of Uber’s business What... how... I don't even know where to begin with this.
Paging rayiner for an "actually this is good" take
Update on AB5
51–60 of 343 posts
Re: Update on AB5
#52As someone who drives Uber on occasion when I'm a little bored and looking for something to do, I think it's great that I'm not an Uber employee. I can do 10 hours or I can do 0 hours based on nothing but my own whim. I don't have a problem with people organizing to get a better deal for themselves, but I like the way it works now. I've worked for companies that misclassify workers, and Uber isn't it as far as I unde…
Yeah, in your case it would make perfect sense to consider you an independent contractor instead of an employee. I guess the issue arises when we got people working full-time hours but still being classified as an independent contractor.
> I guess the issue arises when we got people working full-time hours but still being classified as an independent contractor.
Why though? There's plenty of contractors in other industries that work exclusively for a single client, often for 40+ hours per week. In technology in particular it's more common than having multiple concurrent clients (per person, not per consultancy).
Re: Update on AB5
#53Would love to see source data that Uber is referencing (I know it's not possible, as it's highly guarded secret) - I suspect they cherry pick it a lot. "In the US, 92% of drivers drive less than 40 hours per week, and 45% of drivers drive less than 10 hours per week. [...] We will continue to defend the innovation that makes that kind of choice, flexibility, and independence a reality for over 200,000 drivers in Cali…
This is percentage of drivers, not percentage of hours worked.
It would make sense that there are lot of drivers that don't drive very often. They might even have stopped driving altogether, but didn't cancel their account.
It's like a website talking about total users that ever signed up, instead of 7-day active users.
Re: Update on AB5
#54Perfect way to eliminate the competition via regulatory lock out
No, AB5 simply requires that they compete fairly with all other transit systems that recognize their employees as employees. The reality is that all these “gig economy” companies are only able to compete by unfairly claiming that their employees are somehow not their employees.
They're not even able to compete. Neither Uber nor Lyft are profitable.
Re: Update on AB5
#55Would love to see source data that Uber is referencing (I know it's not possible, as it's highly guarded secret) - I suspect they cherry pick it a lot. "In the US, 92% of drivers drive less than 40 hours per week, and 45% of drivers drive less than 10 hours per week. [...] We will continue to defend the innovation that makes that kind of choice, flexibility, and independence a reality for over 200,000 drivers in Cali…
A very clever thing they're doing is conflating being an employee with not having flexible hours, as if part time jobs don't exist. Fast food chains don't hire independent contractors and yet lots of people have flexible shifts.
Re: Update on AB5
#56> drivers’ work is outside the usual course of Uber’s business What... how... I don't even know where to begin with this.
Cool I look forward to Uber drivers showing up with a rickshaw or giving piggy back rides.
Re: Update on AB5
#57I 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…
The simple solution is to ban the use of contractor workers in the taxi industry. It's too precarious of a job, and one that many people rely on for a sole source of income.
This would take the pressure of other industries that use independent contractors, such as tech.
Right now a couple of bad actors like Uber, are ruining the independent contractor category of work. Forcing states to put more laws in place.
Re: Update on AB5
#58[deleted]
Re: Update on AB5
#59So basically their tactic is to eke out a few more years out of their business model as their fight with California over the classification slowly snakes its way through the courts to the California supreme court, and hope that in the meantime they can come up with a better business model?
It is actually not a terribly bad idea. They have the money to pay for the slow court battle, and it is strictly cheaper than complying.
Re: Update on AB5
#60Uber's defense is that it is licensing lead generation software to drivers, and that it just takes a commission from each trip as payment for use of its software. In many ways, I can see it. I think the issue lies in a lot of Uber's current policies around drivers e.g. very strict rules around cancellations. If Uber was just a lead generation provider then it shouldn't care or intervene if a driver decides they don't…
Yeah, even being charitable, I don't see how Uber's model[1] is remotely reasonable. They pretty clearly take direct control over the relationship. The rider deals with Uber, and the driver deals with Uber. Nothing at all like the ebay/fiverr "hey find someone to link up with" model.
[1] Edit: To clarify, I mean "the model they're promoting of what their core business is", i.e. the claim that "they're a lead-gen platform they license out"; I'm not saying they're business model is financially non-viable.