California Labor Union Leader: "Our system is broken. It would be an understatement to say we are disappointed by this decision allowing companies to buy their way out of our state’s labor laws" Uber Executive: "Our system is working. We’re pleased that the court respected the will of the people by upholding a voter-approved law.”
US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors
81–90 of 212 posts
Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors
#82Gig workers aren't quite contractors and aren't quite employees. Maybe need a third class of worker.
they have the flexibility of contractors (they can show up, work as much or as little as they want, and stop whenever they want) but their compensation is set by whomever requisitioned them.
Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors
#83California Labor Union Leader: "Our system is broken. It would be an understatement to say we are disappointed by this decision allowing companies to buy their way out of our state’s labor laws" Uber Executive: "Our system is working. We’re pleased that the court respected the will of the people by upholding a voter-approved law.”
Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Unions are the major force pushing for gig workers to be classified as employees because they’d be able to unionize. What stops them unionising?
NRLB doesn't offer a clear way for contractors to unionize. By clear way, it might be "no way".
Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors
#85Our government, and large swaths of the media, is owned by banks and corporations. The vestiges of the pre-industrial democracy we had persist as a sham to keep the electorate’s consent for and compliance with this system. Uber and Lyft are not people and shouldn’t have been permitted to spend $1 on this campaign nor towards the campaign of any politician. Unfortunately it won’t be until bread is $30/loaf that the pu…
Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors
#86Everyone seems to forget or disregard the fact that these lawsuits are paid for by the taxi industry. Even when they dig up a few Uber drivers, it’s all a sham. 70% of surveyed rideshare drivers prefer to be independent contractors. If there was a serious majority for employment, Uber and Lyft simply wouldn’t exist.
Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
Paid per hour, free to chose their working hours, free to work for multiple employers at the same time, etc. How are they not contractors? They're way more contractors than the contractors that were working 9 to 5, 5 days a week, for years, for my FAANG.
But the fee/payment is dictated by the company which takes away a significant part of autonomy I guess
Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors
#88Everyone seems to forget or disregard the fact that these lawsuits are paid for by the taxi industry. Even when they dig up a few Uber drivers, it’s all a sham. 70% of surveyed rideshare drivers prefer to be independent contractors. If there was a serious majority for employment, Uber and Lyft simply wouldn’t exist.
However, I can provide with 100% certainty that I would prefer being paid 1 trillion dollars an hour instead of my current wage. In fact, I would prefer being paid every dollar amount between my current wage and 1 trillion dollars an hour.
Labor preference does not dictate market conditions. Labor preference has an especially low impact in circumstances where the compensation is low and competition for good paying jobs is fierce. It is wrong to state that if a serious majority of ride-share drivers wanted employment Uber and Lyft wouldn't exist.
Re: US court rules Uber and Lyft workers are contractors
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I find the article's headline misleading. I see Uber stock is up 6% pre-market. That suggests to me investors thinks Uber's liabilities are reduced as a result of this ruling.
The fight over contractor status was versus regular employee status, which would require providing benefits. So, market rejoice, these driver folks are on their own. Editorializing a bit, but CA referendums are so silly. I was asked to vote to resolve an employee/employer dispute in kidney dialysis centers. There's so many of those types of things.
It's been struck down three times and, according to her heavily biased opinion, would seriously adversely affect access and choice. The company spent something like several hundred million dollars fighting that proposition and two before it.
Crazy that one special interest can get some signatures to fight for something like that with the only real goal to boost their profits well another special interest fights against it to save theirs.
Meanwhile, hundreds of millions of dollars are burned in the process.