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

Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 781 posts

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#561

Post by Polylactic_acid »

j2kun wrote: post #161
Cookingboy wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing, but since now they have the added cost of health insurance, minimal wage, etc, it would make more sense for them to arrange pre-set shifts for the drivers to optimize for supply/demand based on time of the day. Some drivers would like that arrangement, especially if that's their full time job. But some drivers who do this for supplemental income may not be able to meet the demand of the new fixed schedule se…

You'd think a multi-billion-dollar company with so many smart engineers could figure out how to fit both types of work into their system, if it really mattered. Silicon Valley exceptionalism is a garbage dream if paying your workers minimum wage and having flexible schedules at the same time is an insurmountable challenge.

Of course they could work it out. They are just kicking up a big stink because they don't want to pay the extra costs of hiring an employee.

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#562

Post by [deleted] »

neuroanalysis wrote: post #447
abvdasker wrote: post #320

The 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…

Profitability should have no bearing on whether drivers are classified as employees or contractors. If these companies can’t turn a profit while complying with the law then they don’t have a viable business model. That is entirely their problem. Furthermore, the assumptions you make regarding future hiring practices are unfounded. Nothing stipulates that resumes or interviews, let alone in person, would be required t…

[deleted]

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#563

Post by TheMagicHorsey »

I don't know how a judge can so cavalierly grant preliminary injunction in this case when the facts have not been examined.

Anyway, it must be due to the recent law passed in California. Ultimately the citizens of California determine its shitty laws, and they can enjoy their rideless future and the bad old days of taxi cab monopolies because they went along with taxi medallion holder propaganda.

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#564

Post by WC3w6pXxgGd »

neuroanalysis wrote: post #447
abvdasker wrote: post #320

The 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…

Profitability should have no bearing on whether drivers are classified as employees or contractors. If these companies can’t turn a profit while complying with the law then they don’t have a viable business model. That is entirely their problem. Furthermore, the assumptions you make regarding future hiring practices are unfounded. Nothing stipulates that resumes or interviews, let alone in person, would be required t…

> If these companies can’t turn a profit while complying with the law then they don’t have a viable business model

Are you seriously telling me that if people don't interact freely in the way bureaucrats want them to interact, then those people should, by law, not be allowed to interact?

Big Brother knows best, huh.

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#565

Post by dragonwriter »

sytelus wrote: post #518
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can imagine Uber offering jobs v.s. contractor positions with differing levels of support, remuneration, and expectations. Legally, in California, they can't do that. As outlined in the article, the 'ABC test' is the legal test for determining whether someone is an employee or a contractor. The 'B' part of that test is "The worker performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business." If…

You are interpreting it all wrong. Staff augmentation happens all the time who do same work as employees. The fundamental difference is amount of time you are hiring the person for. If you say I need person to augment my existing staff only for 6 months then they need not be employee. This is why many contractors are forced on leave after certain number of months. A contractor may also chose to work, say, 20hr per we…

> The fundamental difference is amount of time you are hiring the person for.

That's not the fundamental difference in either federal law or the California ABC test. It's not a factor in the ABC test, [0] and it's one of several factors in the “relationship” prong of the federal test. [1]

[0] https://www.californiaemploymentlawreport.com/2019/03/unders...

[1] https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/understanding-employee-vs-contr...

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#566

Post by ehsankia »

momokoko wrote: post #494
ehsankia wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can they 1. Work for the competitors 2. work as much or as little as they want 3. Take as much vacation time as they want 4. Leave with zero advance notice Also, should Twitch streamers and Youtube creators also become employees? What about Etsy/Ebay sellers or AirBnB hosts?

In the US, and more specifically California? Absolutely they can. California, like almost all states in the US, is an “at-will” employment state. None of these things are required under employment law at all. Can I ask where you found this wildly false information? Do you happen to live outside the US? Nowhere in California labor law does it prevent people from taking vacations or anything else you mentioned if they…

> Can I ask where you found this wildly false information? Do you happen to live outside the US?

I worked in California for a few years but I'm not longer there. And those were questions, they weren't meant to be stated as facts.

> Nowhere in California labor law does it prevent people from taking vacations

Hmm, maybe I understood my rights wrong, but from my understanding I wasn't free to take an arbitrary number of vacation days without getting fired. I know Netflix allows that but other than them, wouldn't most employers let you go if you just decided to not show up on random days?

Also, again I'm not expert, but are you sure that someone can simultaneously work for Apple and Google? That doesn't sound right but again, these are mostly discussion questions, let me know if I'm missing something here.

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#567

Post by dragonwriter »

unishark wrote: post #456
shrimpx wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> argued that they were basically doing the same work as employees I think that's case by case though. Contractors usually do finite focused projects and don't want to be employees. I myself was self-employed for 5 years doing specific contracts as a software engineer. I was "writing code" which is "the same work" as employees. Were all those companies breaking the law? > Legally, in California, they can't do that. D…

> I think that's case by case though. Contractors usually do finite focused projects and don't want to be employees. I myself was self-employed for 5 years doing specific contracts as a software engineer. I was "writing code" which is "the same work" as employees. Were all those companies breaking the law? The AB5 law has only been in effect since Jan 1. The federal rules are already very strict. Generally contractor…

> The AB5 law has only been in effect since Jan 1

AB5 essentially codified the test the California Supreme Court adopted in Dynamex (April 30, 2018), though.

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#568

Post by nl »

anticensor wrote: post #535
nl wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Uber sets the rates the customer pays, and the driver gets what Uber chooses. The driver doesn't have the ability to turn up a dial and say "I'm going to charge more now". (This isn't the only distinction between an employee and contractor though of course)

> The driver doesn't have the ability to turn up a dial and say "I'm going to charge more now". A licenced taxi driver cannot do that, either.

Yes, and them being reclassified as employees is a possible outcome: https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/California-s-gi...

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#569

Post by aborsy »

Uber provides a platform connecting riders with drivers, not employment. The driver is employed by the rider.

The driver is free to work his or her own hours, routes, work or not work etc.

Uber overseas the platform to ensure it operates properly and there won’t be victims.

There are many of these platforms. It makes no sense to force LinkedIn classify job seekers as employees.

Re: Uber and Lyft ordered by California judge to classify drivers as employees

#570

Post by unishark »

aspenmayer wrote: post #505
unishark wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think that's case by case though. Contractors usually do finite focused projects and don't want to be employees. I myself was self-employed for 5 years doing specific contracts as a software engineer. I was "writing code" which is "the same work" as employees. Were all those companies breaking the law? The AB5 law has only been in effect since Jan 1. The federal rules are already very strict. Generally contractor…

I am saddened to be reminded of the story in your link, as I read it at the time it was posted, and was also saddened then. I’m not convinced you have adequately eliminated other potential reasons he may have done the uncharacteristic thing he did. Even if he was in his right mind, I’m not convinced he had anyone’s interest at heart but his own personal one, as jobs are a form of social control. He desired to be free…

> I do see your point, though I disagree.

I'm not clear what point you are referring to. It's possible for all sides in a story to be wrong in their actions.

Post reply on HN