Slashdot Mirror
Uber Drivers Are Employees, Not Contractors, Says California Labor Commission
siddesu writes: The California Labor Commission has ruled Uber drivers are employees and not independent contractors. The ruling has serious implications for Uber's business model, since it will now be required to offer its drivers benefits that meet the requirements of the Californian labor laws. "Uber had argued that its drivers are independent contractors, not employees, and that it is "nothing more than a neutral technology platform." But the commission said Uber controls the tools driver use, monitors their approval ratings and terminates their access to the system if their ratings fall below 4.6 stars." Uber has previously suspended drivers for registering their cars as commercial vehicles.
That's the place where they use water on almonds instead of people, right?
Be a cab company and claim not to be.
Violate the law about cabs and pretend they don't apply to you.
Generally be a bunch of self-entitled assholes who think they magically get to decide what laws apply to them.
Act like whiny fucking spoiled children when the world doesn't see it your way.
Fuck Uber. The assholes who own it are just delusional dicks.
Here is an update to this ruling found in another article:
Update: Uber pointed out that the ruling only applies to one driver. “Reuters’ original headline was not accurate. The California Labor Commission’s ruling is non-binding and applies to a single driver,” a spokesperson said. “Indeed it is contrary to a previous ruling by the same commission, which concluded in 2012 that the driver ‘performed services as an independent contractor, and not as a bona fide employee.’ Five other states have also come to the same conclusion. It’s important to remember that the number one reason drivers choose to use Uber is because they have complete flexibility and control. The majority of them can and do choose to earn their living from multiple sources, including other ride sharing companies.”
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
Sounds about right.
Maybe if they were not exclusive to Uber, they might be considered non-employees. Otherwise, they are just like a pizza delivery guy, working for a pizza shop.
Does this mean by extension that the "bloggers" who contribute to the Huffington Post are employees?
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
cynicism gets old. Its cheap, risk-averse, hipsterism that gets us nowhere.
What delusional, drunken moneys could possibly claim Uber is worth $40 freaking billion dollars? What's that, like 4 centuries worth of projected income?
Who the hell makes up these stupid valuations?
They have an app, and a staunch belief they're exempt form laws.
But $40 billions dollars? That's complete fantasy that is. Real corporations with real assets and real income might be worth that.
Holy .com level of overvalued companies.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Whether or not an employee owns the vehicle has no bearing on being a contractor or not. That's as silly as saying "Sales people for [company x] own their own vehicles so they should be contractors".
What determines the difference between an employee and contractor is how much control the company asserts over the person.
Can someone point me to the relevant oral argument in this case? There's something, when one listens to an oral argument, that you'll never get from anything written. Thanks.
It doesn't work that way. And the IRS would like to have an expensive discussion with you about that.
Facebook is billions of individual "Skinner Boxes." And if you use it you are the pigeon!
Or they might actually care a smidgeon about the labor in their state rather than simply deepthroating corporate cock like you do?
I've seen plenty of drivers who subscribed to Uber, Lyft and Sidecar. The labor commission is simply wrong, and I hope Uber litigates this all the way to the supreme court if necessary.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
There's only two reasons Uber would have independent contractors
1) They want to cut costs by shorting their employees.
2) They want to pretend they're not involved when things go wrong.
This decision doesn't outlaw a single thing.
How are they wrong exactly? You disliking their decision does not make it wrong.
In order to totally eliminate this as a concern, going forward Uber may require drivers to belong to more than one service - as a programming consultant I face the same issue with some clients were they demand to know I have other recent clients also so I cannot claim to be an employee, and there are often hard limits on length of work.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Anyone can have multiple jobs...
If each employee owns their own vehicle then they should be contractors.
Owning your own equipment is just one of many criteria, and is not enough by itself to make you a contractor. Other considerations:
- Is there a written contract?
- Do you set your own hours?
- Do you also work for other contractees?
- Do you set your own prices?
- Do you have leeway to decide how and in what order you complete tasks?
- Are expenses reimbursed?
- Does the contractee/employer provide training?
- Can you quit at any time without liability? Contractors ususally have a legal obligation to complete their contract.
There are just some of the criteria, and there is no magic number that have to be met. It is subjective. But the more the better. The bottom line is if you want to treat someone as a contractor for tax purposes, you also have to treat them as a contractor for work purposes as well.
There's only two reasons California would do this. 1) They are after more tax revenue. 2) Some bureaucrat wants to throw his weight around.
There are only two people who don't understand a false dichotomy. You, and you.
Do these companies include exclusion agreements? e.g. To drive for Uber you cannot drive for Lyft?
Hmmm ... is there any evidence of this "Illumitaxi" conspiracy? Or are you simply off your meds?
Where I live, the taxi companies were forced to install security camera, over their objections, when a passenger was assaulted by a cab driver.
They quickly changed their tune when one of their own drivers was violently robbed. Since then it has been used to solve several crimes.
They're also forced to conduct regular inspections, and have cars no older than a certain age.
So, if municipalities are passing laws, over the objections of taxi companies, for passenger safety and accountability ... WTF insane conspiracy theory is required to assume this is about some powerful taxi cartel calling the shots?
How about municipalities have passed laws saying commercial vehicles for hire operate under a set of rules, and Uber claiming those rules don't apply is nothing more than bullshit wishful thinking?
Honestly, this crap about the taxi cartel makes you sound like a crazy irrational fool who needs to find a conspiracy for no reason other than you think is sounds good.
Laws regulating these kinds of industries have existed for decades, and the taxi companies have to suck it up and follow them.
Since when does some asshole with an app get to be exempt from laws? That's some silly bullshit right there.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
FTA:
"But the commission said Uber controls the tools driver use,"
You mean the Uber app? That's what Uber is, isn't it? If you hire contractors to staff a phone bank, the contractors don't get to bring in their own phones to use, you can make them use your own phone system.
monitors their approval ratings and terminates their access to the system if their ratings fall below 4.6 stars.
So - performance reviews are forbidden when you are a contractor?
Last I checked, if you work for Uber you can work whenever and wherever you want, which is, pretty much, a textbook contractor arrangement.
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
With that reasoning, if I drive for multiple services, who is responsible for providing benefits? All 6 different applications, er. companies? A combination of all?
Unfortunately, this is not as cut and dry as you believe. The majority of uber drivers also drive for different services. There are even applications being developed to help drivers best monitize working for multiple services - I.e. When are the best hours to deliver food or people.
Auto mechanics purchase their own standard tools, sockets, screw driver, pliers, etc and they are not considered contractors.
Don't expect to make any money without us getting our fair share!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Can't compete with Uber because Uber doesn't play by the rules.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
With that reasoning, if I drive for multiple services, who is responsible for providing benefits? All 6 different applications, er. companies? A combination of all?
Depends on which companies you'd be classified as an employee of them and what the terms of the benefits are in your resulting employment contract. Possibly none if you aren't considered an employee.
Unfortunately, this is not as cut and dry as you believe.
I never said anything was cut-and-dry. I in fact stated the opposite as opposed to the AC GP which tried to claim the situation was cut-and-dry just because they owned their own cars. It's an entirely subjective decision based on many factors.
The majority of uber drivers also drive for different services.
Which doesn't mean you can't be classified as an employee of one or all of those companies. There are plenty of people with multiple jobs and they are all still considered employees of each of the companies they work for.
By that logic anyone who has more than one job is a contractor. Whether or not benefits are required is based on the number of hours one works for a company not the number of companies one works for.
Hmmm ... is there any evidence of this "Illumitaxi" conspiracy?
Yes. $1,000,000 taxi medallions.
"His name was James Damore."
Whether or not an employee owns the vehicle has no bearing on being a contractor or not.
Should be amended to say "has no bearing in and of itself" because whether or not you own your vehicle can be a factor but is not a sole factor.
Let's not forget the whole medallion system was created in NYC because in the 30's there were so many cabs that emergency vehicles had trouble moving around the city, among other reasons such as the public was worried about maintenance on the taxis and that the drivers were working 16 to 18 hours a day. The other option besides the medallion system was to have the city take over the cabs.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Uber pointed out that the ruling only applies to one driver.
Translation, "We're getting what we want as cheaply as possible, screw everyone else."
Go on, citizen, stamp the vote card. R or D, your choice.
When you do a construction project, you contract several roles out usually.
When you do you often:
1) Dictate the materials they must use
2) In some way the tools they must use
3) You can get rid of them if they fail to meet your quality standard
How does construction work in California?
Also under the definition that they appear to have given, people who sell on Amazon and Ebay are employees.
1) You have to use their tool (ebay or amazon)
2) Payment goes to amazon and they pass on their cut
3) You have to follow their terms and rules
4) They monitor their approval rating
This appears to be exactly the way Uber operates.
Uber and Amazon both control the platform.
The drivers or sellers must follow their terms and rules.
They both monitor feedback and can in some ways offer economic punishment (suspension of service, etc)
Am I missing something here?
None of those "facts" can be used to determine who is a contractor and whom is an part-time or full-time employee.
Um, yeah, it does, it's illegal to offer just a wage now.
Which is stupid. I was just with a driver who's a teacher by day, he doesn't need a second set of benefits - that would just take money out of wages and it ends up hurting the people that the state purports to help.
Wonder what the public key field is for?
If people think CA is onerous, you should read up on working as a contractor in the UK. It's insane!
I've seen plenty of drivers who subscribed to Uber, Lyft and Sidecar. The labor commission is simply wrong, and I hope Uber litigates this all the way to the supreme court if necessary.
-jcr
Ha ha ha ha ha ha. The labor comission is spot on.
Poor Uber, it's hard to game the system eh ? Employees that are not employees, taxis that are not taxis, commercial drivers that are not commercial drivers. You get the drift. Uber like many other new enterprises wants to privatise the profits and externalize the costs. And the poor drivers are left out in the cold. For once good job California. Hope that other States will follow in smacking down Uber.
That makes more sense.
If FedEx drivers can be independent contractors, so can Ubers.
So by their logic I'm an employee of youtube, etsy, facebook, and twitter.
Fucking morons.
Uber is on it's way to the grave yard...
Services like Uber have a serious problem. They want to not be taxi services because of the regulations, but they want to do business as if they where a taxi service. So on one hand, they want to claim to be a means of arranging a private deal between two private citizens and claiming their commission in the process, but on the other hand they don't want to run a taxi service or have any of their "drivers" running a taxi service.
I don't think we've seen the last of these kinds of issues for Uber and the like. Somehow, I'm figuring that things like this (Uber is actually an employer in some cases) or some of the other issues of needing commercially registered vehicles, commercial drivers licenses and associated medical certificates to go along with the required "on duty" and "rest" time regulations will eventually catch up with Uber and others.
Eventually, for Uber to stay in business the laws will need to change for taxi services in general. I don't think regulators will just go out, throw up their hands and say "Forget it, let Uber roll on". I think they will use stuff like this decision and enforcement of existing commercial transportation laws and force Uber drivers into a more traditional Taxi business with all that uncomfortable regulation and overhead that Uber so wishes to avoid. Hopefully, regulators will see the value of Uber and move to eliminate some of the more difficult regulations, but somehow I figure the local government is more likely to respond to that taxi service in their voting district than the ramblings of some internet company in Cali who cannot vote for anything.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Will California now say that anyone renting out their spare bedroom is an Airbnb employee? Why stop there? Aren't full-time eBay sellers doing the same thing, and shouldn't eBay have to make them employees too?
awesome post!!
this is exactly what I was thinking as I was reading that article.
This 1,000 times over. Follow the money and you'll find the real reason why there's so much manufactured outrage against Uber and other rideshare companies.
I've never used any of the services, so honest question here...
Does Uber (just to use one example) set the schedule, or do drivers come and go as they please? An employer-employee relationship gives a lot more power to the employer. Any drivers fighting to be an employee might end up regretting it later.
Uber replaces all their drivers with H1-B visa workers.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
When I worked as a contractor, I worked exclusively for one organization. I had to use their systems to track my time--Deltek only, controlled by them--and their computer equipment. They retained the option to fire me if I violated the terms of my contract, failing to deliver as agreed.
I've seen contractors fire clients, too. A client hired a second contractor to work on the same work for comparison? That's your work. If he finishes, they may terminate your contract early. Contractor fires client, finds other contract work that isn't a waste of his fucking time.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
I've seen plenty of drivers who subscribed to Uber, Lyft and Sidecar. The labor commission is simply wrong, and I hope Uber litigates this all the way to the supreme court if necessary
Sounds like multiple part time employers.
"- Do you set your own prices? - You choose to take the fair at the offered rate. You don't like it, then don't take it"
Spot the shill. The answer is "no"; any waffly answer is spin.
None of those "facts" can be used to determine who is a contractor and whom is an part-time or full-time employee.
Sure they can. I suggest you read up on California law because the factors stated in the summary are very much what are used to determine if someone is an employee or a contractor.
Shop employees use the shop's tools.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Or they might actually care a smidgeon about the labor in their state rather than simply deepthroating corporate cock like you do?
Apparently you were not in California when prop 30 went through, and the state came after everyone for retroactive income tax, which applied to the labor in the state as well as small businesses operating on a cash flow basis, to be paid with money they no longer had in hand.
This is just another money grab. Someone has to pay to gold plate the public buildings, you know, instead of spending the money on the people of California.
When I was a contractor, my hours were fixed. I worked for one client. The price was negotiated, but I negotiate my salary the same way. Project management may require and review your work breakdown structure, adjusting how you'll schedule the work, to maximize stakeholder engagement and minimize expensive mistakes and rework. Contracts may be Fixed Fee, Cost plus Fixed Fee, Time and Materials, or Fixed Fee Plus Awards: a Time and Materials reimburses your costs and pays for your time, while a Cost plus Fixed Fee reimburses your costs and pays for your estimated time.
People have funny ideas what a contractor is. It's just a legal agreement. The real question is do you pay them by W2 or 1099?
Support my political activism on Patreon.
You choose to take the fair at the offered rate. You don't like it, then don't take it
And does uber take note of things like that and react if it occurs "too often"?
taxis that are not taxis
Damn right, they're not taxis. Uber exists because taxis SUCK.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
I supposed that your vision and intelligence have made you fabulous wealthy?
I know bartenders working at more than one bar.
I don't see your point. Working more than one job means that you aren't an employee ?
When the wife (in california) switched from contractor to full-time employee, the only thing that changed was she got paid less.
The equipment and software she uses is still "provided by the company."
Her performance reviews are still "done by her "company-provided manager".
While a contractor if she had of failed performance reviews, she would of been let go.
--- which is an actual difference, failed performance reviews (for non-contractors) will more likely get you coaching than the door.
Am I missing something here?
Yes, you are.
I don't understand this analogy.
Car analogy anyone?
I'd post one, but... most small shop car mechanics are independent contractors. They own their own tools (like Uber drivers own their own cars), they carry their own insurance (like Uber drivers carry their own insurance), they set their own hours (like Uber drivers set their own hours), they can decline a specific job (like Uber drivers can decline a specific job), they can work for other shops (like Uber drivers can work for other car services or elsewhere), and they have a written contract (like Uber drivers have a written contract).
So really, there is no car analogy that supports the GP's proposition.
Am I missing something here?
Yes, you are missing the part where both construction contractors and eBay sellers set the prices for their respective offerings, while Uber drivers do not.
Ebay: Hey we're not an auction site. (Dodges county by county laws against auctions)
Paypal: We're not a bank either. (Dodges many laws about banks everywhere).
Uber: Hey we're just doing what everyone else has in terms of dodging laws.
God spoke to me
Am I missing something here?
http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/faq_independentcontractor.htm
"There is no set definition of the term "independent contractor" and as such, one must look to the interpretations of the courts and enforcement agencies to decide if in a particular situation a worker is an employee or independent contractor... DLSE starts with the presumption that the worker is an employee."
Basically they are saying that everyone is an employee unless proven otherwise, but there is no standard for proof. Awesome system ya got there.
The problem with that argument is that Uber has a lot of control over how it's drivers look/act, and work. And the way you determine whether somebody is a part-time employee or a contractor is how much control the person paying them has over how, precisely, the job is done. Given that Uber is insisting that it has the right to tell it's drivers how their vehicles are registered, it's very hard for me to see how they can seriously argue they don't have boss-like control. Independent contractors would be responsible for getting the proper paperwork on their own, which means that if the state ruled they had been wrong they would be on the hook for whatever penalties were on offer.
Working for more then one company at once is irrelevant to this. I work for Home Depot and H and R Block. That doesn't mean they get to treat me as a contractor and force me pay the boss portion of Social Security/Medicare taxes myself.
Since they aren't allowed to subcontract, it hurts the case for being a contractor
If a pizza delivery driver doesn't show up at their job as scheduled or decides they won't deliver a particular pizza, they can expect to lose their job.
If a Uber driver decides not to work at any point in time or decides not to take a particular fare I don't think they are at any risk of their relationship with Uber being terminated for those actions.
Quite a difference.
Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading
That doesn't necessarily follow, however, the drivers may be entitled to mileage.
www.wavefront-av.com
Indeed. I read one article about this that indicated that drivers were complaining about working more than 40 hours a week (presumably, w/o receiving premium pay for those additional hours). However, with these services, the only reason that they worked more than 40 hours was because they decided to - they are never required to work. If they were employees, they would almost always be banned from working more than 40 hours (or, maybe, 30 hours just to keep them from being "full time employees" for some government regulation) because Uber would usually would choose to pay someone else who hadn't worked 40 hours yet at a "regular" rate rather than an "overtime" rate. Those whiners would probably not like the result.
Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading
Yup.
You;re confusing yourself with details.
The difference between a contractor and an employee is that more of an employee's decisions are made by his boss. Uber controls the vehicles it's drivers use, including specific banning specific makes, insisting of specific models, not allowing older model years, and colors. They have to use a smartphone with a supported app.
OTOH, a contractor could show up at your house with hand tools he'd borrowed from his Amish buddy, a brand-new consumer-grade drill, or a 25-year-old commercial grade Dewalt. Since he's a contractor, and you're smart enough to have put time limits in the written contract, you don't give a shit which of the three options he chose, you just give a shit whether he can finish the damn job. n many cases you're out of the house, so he could work a 24-hour shift and then take two days off if he wanted. He controls how he works, therefore he's a contractor and an independent businessman.
Same with eBay or Amazon. All they require is internet access with a newish web browser. Other then that you can do whatever the fuck you want. Their sellers could work at 3 AM naked. They could work 9-5 in business suits. They could work 4 AM to 5:30 AM in the uniform of the Royal Hussars. They have 100% control of their actual work conditions, thus they are also independent businessmen and contractors.
OTOH, driving at any level for Uber requires a relatively recent (post-2000) car, bans a specific model (the Crown Victoria), and higher levels specify shit like the color of the car and what the seats are made of. Uber will yell at you if you get the more expensive commercial vehicle registration.
So Uber drivers have some pretty significant control over their jobs (for example: there's dress code), but a lot less control then actual contractors or the folks who sell on eBay.
Central thesis ("artificial limits is bad") is unsupported. Does not describe system prior to medallion system. Please see me after class
Will Uber penalize you for choosing hours where nobody needs a ride, rejecting too many offered rides, etc.?
Yup.
Sounds like a boss. And if Uber's the boss then the drivers an employee. This is not one of those situations where the Judge applies a sixteen part test, it;'s one where he eyeballs who has more control over the work environment, and Uber's basically designed their system to have as much control as possible without being an official employer.
They have a specialty of going to just the line of the law and seeing how close they can get without being fined into oblivion. And if they're actually firing people who register their cars commercially it is quite hard to argue they don't have boss-level control over the workplace.
from dusters and drones to there the always will be ........... phrases to describe any economic down turn, we are all going to be cast on our anvils for what has occured with these guidance i/c components. be wary in the next few years the all new schooling to sell will be small craft pilots licences.
Let's be honest, Uber is a cab company in everything but name. So, it's no surprise that governments treat Uber like a cab company -- something governments have the power to do.
Many commenters (understandably) don't like the regulations for cab companies and thus don't want to see Uber treated like one -- leading to the senseless denial that Uber is cab company (which it is).
What these commenters suggest is not how the legal system should work. The executive branch of government should enforce the laws. Commenters should instead take issue with the legislative branch for writing the laws in the first place.
And you know what? In some places the legislative branch does listen. Here in WI, the state legislature passed a law last month preempting local ordinances and allowing Uber to operate state wide (with some regulation). As a consequence, Uber is extending service to 5 new areas in Wisconsin. (Believe it or not, that means Uber will operate in 8 Wisconsin locations. Apparently there's demand. Who knew?)
If so, likely no differently than if the gardening service (a one man operation) I contract with doesn't show up and mow my lawn on Thursday too often and I tell them their services are no longer necessary.
Or, no different than if the gardening service I contract with decides that I'm wasting their time negotiating on the price of removing some shrubs and they tell me that they will no longer provide services to me.
He's definitely a contractor, not an employee of mine.
Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading
Really,
If the courts can deem Uber drivers NOT to be contractors. Then first off, that calls into question ALL taxi services since most drivers lease their cars/taxi permit from the owner.
But more so, what does this decision say for ALL of us IT folks? Hundreds of thousands of whom are hired as contractors.
This decision will pretty much shake up all the Silicon Valley corps if left to stand. Once the courts realize how much big $$$ money they jeopardized, they'll recant this decision.
And frankly, I think Uber more than almost all contractors, is clearly a contracting service.
Especially since "Contract" FedEx Drivers are much more tightly controlled by FedEx than Uber Drivers are by Uber.
Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading
The main differences are as follows;
1. Uber sells a service and Amazon sell items.
2. Uber takes a request and directs that request to a driver chosen by Uber. Amazon connects a specific purchaser to the seller they chose.
3. Uber sets the price for the trip. The price is set by the seller on Amazon.
Yeah, there are labor laws for a reason and if you're using "contractors" you don't have to pay minimum wage for example. There are some Uber drivers that have learned how to game the system and earn OK money, but they work hard and hustle customers.
The average Uber driver probably makes less than minimum wage, - especially once their expenses are factored in. Uber pays a premium for working certain hours, accepting 90% of rides, taking at least one ride per hour in that time frame, etc. It's hard to qualify for the premium all the time.
So really what it amounts to is that Uber is dancing around labor laws so that they can offer a cheaper and more convenient service. There may or may not be evil intentions, but that's the end result.
I guess the question is when does an arrangement for services cross the line into exploitation? It's not always obvious. I may be perfectly happy to do something for a few bucks on the side or even for free just for the experience or the kicks. But what if someone else is trying to earn a living doing the same thing?
For example, let's say you'd think it be great to sail across the Atlantic on a 70 foot keel boat but you lack experience and a boat. You run across someone advertising the need for crew on a two month sailing tour, - no experience necessary. You have to help pay for food and supplies, plus you have to help sail and maintain the boat along the way. But otherwise there's no charge AND no pay. Sounds like quite an adventure right? Well, a week into it you discover that there's a whole lot of work to do and the "captain" isn't doing much of it. In fact, he's got paying guests that aren't doing anything at all. You want off but the best he'll do is drop you at the next island and you've got pay for your own way home.
Well, there are laws that govern this kind of thing because it is very easy to exploit people.
In many cases a subcontractor designation is just a way to avoid paying benefits, half of social security tax, and workmens' comp. The role of "consultant" is often in that category. It's a high-status name for a lackey with no benefits.
As a renovation contractor my subs are very clearly defined in Federal tax law: They must have their own business, with their own tools and vehicle. I'm not allowed to hire someone as a contractor simply because they agree to work without benefits. Uber drivers have their own vehicle, but not their own business. Nor are they in a position to negotiate a contract with Uber, which is what a sub would do.
not just benefits
pay for waiting for a ride time
mileage reimbursement (No deductions may be taken from any amounts paid to employees as mileage reimbursements)
car insurance
cell phone reimbursement (in CA you can't force a employee to rent a phone you must make it free or pay them to use there own phone)
Not sticking up for Uber which I don't believe is any real business model. Just another Dot Com startup trying to skirt basic regulations in a mature business such as cab service. But I have to ask California labor board. If Uber drivers are not contractors and are employee's. How come you ignore so many other labor laws?
Gee, how many illegals are working in CA? Not classified as employee's or contractors? I totally get that many companies are now seeing the advantage of non employee labor. But its certainly nothing new.
Was there a set term for this contract? Was the contract continually renewed?
The point is that if there is no end to the term then it is not a contract but an employment agreement. Uber agreements do not have a specific termination date.
Auto mechanics purchase their own standard tools, sockets, screw driver, pliers, etc
I believe that they also purchase their own metric tools.
*There's obviously no guarantee of demand, just as there's no guarantee there'll be a car nearby when you request one...
Airbnb are the same as Uber in every sense of the business model that the CA labor department argues against.
In a case where a person's primary source of income is renting out space on Airbnb, yes. However that is likely a very rare occurrence, and certainly not the intended usage of Airbnb. Uber on the other hand functions on the premise that drivers drive primarily for Uber
This dispute is happening in the context of a bunch of shenanigans happening in California, Uber's only on facet of it.
A few months ago there was a big strike between truckers and the trucking companies at the port in Long Beach. the companies insist that the truck drivers are independent contractors because they are paid by the load, not by the hour, and the truckers are "independent operators" because they own the trucks on paper. The problem is the truckers are only allowed to use trucks they lease from the trucking companies, the trucking companies add on various "fees" from the lease bill, they have to make deliveries when they're told (while still not having official hours or a schedule). Critically, the drivers cannot avail themselves of workers comp, overtime or any of the other things an employee would be entitled to. They're employees but the employers have used paper technicalities to reclassify the relationship, strictly for the purposes of evading labor law.
The kinds of disputes are inevitable in a piecework economy, and they were the norm prior to the progressive era in the US. 80 hour weeks with no overtime, paid by the unit, no workplace safety regulations, random fees and wage dockings, and if you complain, maybe we don't need your services anymore.
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
Am I missing something here?
The owner in a construction setting typically doesn't manage the day-to-day details, they leave that up to the Contractor. The Contractor (as in Capital-C) both maintains its own employees that are on-salary in some fashion for the duration of the job, and brings in Subcontractors as contractors (lowercase-c) for a limited duration for a specific aspect of the project with specific scope that isn't open-ended. The Subcontractor may employ salaried employees or may themselves use contractors (lowercase-c) depending on their business model.
Generally the defining points are in degrees of oversight and duration of employment. Those indiviuals engaged as contractors (lowercase-c) usually are overseen in big-picture ways and have shorter duration jobs. Those that are on-staff are probably managed more and their jobs are open-ended, there's no scope built-in to their retention that defines the completion of their business arrangement.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
That's okay, because Uber has other pizza drivers to deliver the pizzas.
Uber owns these drivers because, like employees, they have to bow down and follow Uber's rules:
But the commission said Uber controls the tools driver use, monitors their approval ratings and terminates their access to the system if their ratings fall below 4.6 stars.
Monitoring and firing people based on their performance sounds like a boss/employees type of relationship. That sounds more like dealing with an underling/employee rather than partnering with an independent contractor, the term Uber usually uses to describe its relationship to the taxi drivers.
FexEx drivers are not independent contractors.
Am I missing something here?
Yes, two things.
The first thing is that you are using your own definitions and not the ones applied by labor law. There are six guidelines by Department of Labor. (Integral to business, permanency of relationship, worker's investment in equipment and facilities, nature and degree of control by principal, worker's opportunity of profit/loss, and skill/training necessary. While your brief lists are interesting, they don't match what the government actually uses.
The second thing you are missing is the definition of contractors. This is about the legally defined "independent contractor" or 1099'er, that are one type of contractor who is effectively a person operating as a business. There are other types of jobs that people refer to as contractors, such as short term employment (w2 with a time limit), or cases where employees of one company are brought in to work with another company's employees. Their decision is only about the 1099 style of contracting, which Uber uses.
---
Going through each of the government requirements as they apply to Uber and your Ebay seller example:
Integral test. Uber's core business is connecting people for rides and moving funds between accounts. Drivers provide rides using the service, but they aren't integral to the business of connecting people (although they are necessary to implement the task). Ebay sellers similarly use the service, but aren't integral in providing the service. MOSTLY NEUTRAL, slight bias toward employee.
Permanency test. Some Uber drivers meet this, others don't. Those who infrequently pick up riders, those who are on for an hour or two during the day, they're not really permanent. The ones who have used Uber to replace their income, or drive for many hours each day, they're much more permanent. Most ebay sellers are extremely transitory, having items up for under a week, or using it as a store front for goods that are constantly rotated. WEAK FAIL, some people biased towards employee, others biased toward 1099'er, so maybe some people should be reclassified.
Investment test. Uber has some investment through insurance and their guarantees, but leaves most of the cost to the individual. They've got a weak investment. Ebay has nothing invested in the sellers. WEAK FAIL, the long list of guarantees and insurance they offer to their drivers pushes toward employee.
Nature and degree of control test. Uber has a high amount of control, coordinating all the details of rides,establishing fares, and causing the drivers to be redistributed based on their algorithms, and requirements about the cleanliness and maintenance of the vehicle, but they also have weak control in other areas by not dictating work hours and a few other details. Ebay has zero control. STRONG FAIL, Uber's heavy control over what drivers do pushes strongly toward employee.
Opportunity of P/L test. Uber sets the fare cost, and takes a cut, the driver gets no options. There is no opportunity for additional profit or loss. Nothing they do personally can modify their results, get more business, get better rates, or otherwise modify the opportunity of profit and loss. For the ebay example, Ebay sellers can operate under whatever terms they choose, including running full brick-and-mortar stores, which many sellers start and operate as. STRONG FAIL, these "independent contractor" Uber drivers cannot operate as a business independently.
Level of skill/business acumen test. Uber drivers are hired for being able to drive. They cannot really market themselves independently, take good advantage of business insights, leverage their own personal strengths, modify their business based on any personal skills or talents. Nothing they do personally can modify their products or results. Strong contrast with Ebay where sellers have a large degree of control over what they do and how they do it, what they sell
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
The real world is complex, often too complex to define without introducing tonnes of loopholes. So instead of making an unenforceable law that mega corps run roughshod over you set broad standards defined by legal presidence. If your goal is a just society with a high quality of life it's great. If your after slaves in everything but name? Not so much.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The only good answer I found on this thread. I'm married to a high level tax professional. She has decades of experience and works with the most complex returns for corporations and for high wealth individuals. She has researched and answered this question for several clients, and the answer is always the same - "it depends."
Depends on all the factors above, and more. And just as the concluding sentence by ShainghaiBill says, each case is treated individually and there is no absolute line that can be drawn.
Uber has enough money to argue this in a higher court, and I'm sure they will.
Looking beyond Uber, the general trend to turn all workers into contractors is more of a political than legal debate. We, as a society, need to decide how much to go the Libertarian route vs a more regulated route.
Uber vs California Labor Commission is just one skirmish in a much bigger battle.
Personally I think we need the kind of worker protections the California Labor Commission is saying apply to Uber drivers - and I AM an independent contractor, sole proprietor.
Auto mechanics usually use their own tools, not the shop's.
Uber agreements don't have an employment agreement, either. You can walk from Uber and come back. Unlimited vacation time, work on your terms.
The IRS defines employment as when a corporation has control over how the work gets done, rather than the result of the work. This is strange because clients can engage in planning with contractors to integrate their work and make sure they're not planning things which are not allowed. Nevertheless, the terms with Uber are simple: You drive customers from point A to point B. How you do that is immaterial, as long as the customer is satisfied and corporate ethical standards are maintained (banging dudes in your cab as a part-time prostitute cabbie will probably get you fired).
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Yep. And that's the end of Uber in California!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Uber agreements don't have an employment agreement, either.
There is an agreement between the drives setting out condition of the relationship between the driver and Uber. Labelling it a "contract" or "employment agreement" is semantics.
How you do that is immaterial,
Not so much as it has to abide by the following conditions;
1. Started within a specific time period.
2. Done in an approved vehicle.
3. Done by the driver contracted.
4. Done by the shortest reasonable route.
5. Done for a rate set by Uber
That seems to be quite a bit of control.
Of so, they are independent contractors, to the best of my understanding.
If one is an employee, then they are subject to things like minimum wage laws, which requires at least some participation by the employer to affect what hours the employee works.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Thought all this was settled with Microsoft calling lots of workers contractors although they only worked for one company, long hours, etc. Isn't all this settled case law?
They aren't employees if they don't get paid.
I guess Californians will just have to get along without Uber.
I'd like to get along without California being part of these United States, but that's not possible, is it?
First thing that went though my mind was, "What about people selling things on Ebay or Esty like sites?" Those websites take a cut of each sale. Could this not consider them employees as well?
Posting to cancel incorrect moderation.
You bring up some good examples. Still, I do have a few comments on the difference between 'Contractors' and 'Employees'. It can become quite complicated, which is why this is a court case, and still subject to appeal.
In many cases, the difference between a 'contractor' and a 'employee' is the level of control you have over the workers.
To boil it down as best I can, with an employee you're buying hours of work. With a contractor you're buying product.
So yeah, you can dictate the materials they use, and very much specify quality, but dictating the tools is more iffy. Case law wise, dictating the hours of a contractor is a possible indicator that they're actually an employee, but you're allowed to specify which hours the job site is open.
So long as the contractor delivers the materials in the contract per the conditions of the contract - quantity, time, location, quality, and such, you aren't generally to dictate things like methods* and times worked**.
In the case of Uber drivers, if you have a guy who owns his own car, insurance, sets his own hours, is free to sign up with any ride services he wants to for offering his services(or deliver pizza, or run packages), has right of refusal for any given ride*, etc... He starts looking like a contractor.
*though he doesn't get paid if he doesn't accept it.
*Though specifying that they follow the safety rules of the location/job site is standard
**If an hourly employee gets a 5 hour task done in 1, you've made out. If a contractor gets a 5 hour task done in 1, he's made out.
I don't read AC A human right
California FedEx drivers are employees.
FedEx was sued in 2007 in California Superior Court that they had misclassified their ground drivers based on state employment law. The company lost and appealed. They lost again and went to the California Supreme Court which reaffirmed the Appeals Court. FedEx appealed to the U.S. Ninth Circuit and that court agreed with the state in 2014, that FedEx controlled the drivers and they were independent in name only. The company has finally agreed to settle the case for $228 million.
So,
Simply put, in the U.S., employees use the company's tools and are told when and how to work. Contractors use their own tools and chose which tasks to accept and how to accomplish them. Uber drivers are not, under any federal statute, employees; they're clearly contractors. Fed-Ex drivers drive Fed-Ex's trucks on a route picked by Fed-Ex to destinations selected by Fed-Ex. Clearly employees. The only current ambiguities are in IT contractors who use corporately owned software.
you are insisting on blaming the victims for not stopping your owners from screwing everyone else over.
This, 1000000 times over.
When you hire a contractor, even if they are going to do all the work themselves, to remodel your kitchen, I can assure you that there are often many rules in the contract that the contractor must follow.
For example, the contract may say that interior work shall only be performed between 9:30AM and 4:30PM. It may say that the interior work area must be broom clean at the end of every work day. It may say that no dangerous tools (power, sharp etc) shall be left out in the open in the work area at the end of the work day. It may say that the contractor will provide and pay for a porta-potty and no workers on the site shall use the bathrooms in the house. The contract may specify that the plans shall be followed (which includes a lot of things -- including using a particular product or even applying it in a particular way) unless an ECO is approved. None of these factors makes the contractor (or other workers) your "employee" (for which you should be thankful if one of them falls off a ladder).
Sounds more like a contractor relationship to me. If I'm a realtor and one of the services I arrange for my clients is offering contractors from my "recommended list" and I make it clear to both parties that I get a cut of the job, you can be damned sure that if I begin to receive complaints from my sellers that a particular contractor is rude, doesn't show up on time (or at all), or leaves a mess behind, that contractor will no longer be on my "recommended list" (and may be on my "not recommended" list). My list == Uber.
Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading
Opportunity of P/L test. Uber sets the fare cost, and takes a cut, the driver gets no options.
They have at least some in their selection of vehicles, diving ability(fuel efficient), etc... What about their ability to select jobs? I mean, sign up for Uber, Lyft, etc... all at once?
I don't read AC A human right
By that logic anyone who has more than one job is a contractor. Whether or not benefits are required is based on the number of hours one works for a company not the number of companies one works for.
Perhaps. But a company typically tells you what hours you're working, when, on what, etc.... Uber can't really do anything if you're signed into their app, a lyft fare comes up, and you mark yourself unavailable during that trip, at which point the driver signs into all 3 apps again.
At least, not if you're a contractor. That's a bit different than an employee who works 5 am - 1 pm MWF at McD's, and 10 am - 7 pm at Wendy's THSa.
I don't read AC A human right
OTOH, a contractor could show up at your house with hand tools he'd borrowed from his Amish buddy, a brand-new consumer-grade drill, or a 25-year-old commercial grade Dewalt.
But it's common to dictate what materials they use. Want a modified bitumen roof? If it's torch-down, then that's going to require the contractor to have certain tools. You could also mandate it's peel-and-stick (say, if the building is occupied and you don't want the fire hazard), which is dictating materials/tools.
Same with eBay or Amazon. All they require is internet access with a newish web browser.
Which means a limited number of possible browsers, which all require newer equipment, not a 25 year old computer.
...rambling about hours and nakedness
A construction contractor is often mandated to work within certain hours, can't work naked, can't smoke on the job, etc.
OTOH, driving at any level for Uber requires a relatively recent (post-2000) car, bans a specific model (the Crown Victoria), and higher levels specify shit like the color of the car and what the seats are made of.
Selling on Amazon or Ebay requires a post-2000 browser. It doesn't work on specific browser versions. They have standards and limitations on the products they allow you to sell.
So pretty much all the limitations you're saying makes Uber drivers employees also applies to Amazon/Ebay sellers and/or construction contractors.
This requirement to lease the truck from a particular source is one thing that distinguishes these two cases very significantly. Uber doesn't even OFFER to lease cars or narrowly limit the vehicles that Uber drivers can use (requirements vary by city, but I recall that the requirements for the basic service are something like the car can't be more than about 15 years old, must have four doors, can't be one of a very few prohibited models, can't be a salvage vehicle, and must pass a very basic mechanical inspection). In most cases, the car is a fine personal use vehicle (I suspect few Uber drivers have a dedicated car specifically for their Uber work) and has a liquid resale market as well.
Sure they can. They can pay themselves whatever they want and offer whatever benefits they want. If one of these truckers wants to take the day off, I don't believe they have to tell a soul (not even their wife if they intend on spending the day with their mistress -- but there may be other ramifications of that). Yes, if they accept a load, they agree to perform THAT single task.
Why is there an "insightful" mod and why isn't it "-1"? If I wanted insight, I wouldn't be reading
Not so much as it has to abide by the following conditions;
1. Started within a specific time period.
2. Done in an approved vehicle.
3. Done by the driver contracted.
4. Done by the shortest reasonable route.
5. Done for a rate set by Uber
1. Uber says when you have to start working? Or is it more that they're offering you the chance to take job X with standards Y, which includes 'must start within Z time'?
2. Happens all the time with contracting work. Federal contracts will specify stuff like how much you have to pay your employees. Also, how much of this is 'pass-through' regulation that's more Uber making sure it's contractors are following the law? Many jurisdictions have age limits on commercial passenger vehicles like taxis. Buses and such can be older.
3. Is this really specified?
4. The Uber driver is paid on the basis of the 'shortest reasonable route', but is he really required to take it? Other than that would be a sure way to get 1 star ratings, and Uber stops referring clients to you if you drop too low.
5. Yeah, this is employee-like, but there are contracting companies that buy piece-work at set prices.
I don't read AC A human right
Most pizza drivers are considered independent contractors by the food establishments to avoid payment for gas, insurance, and maintenance for the vehicles. The drivers are clearly misclassified, but it is up to them to file a complaint and it will usually mean loss of a job.
Hmm... That's rather informative. It's good to see the 'wider' picture.
There's a vast difference between saying 'You have to pick the customers up in a clean vehicle that was made before the year 2011' because clean is just 'good business' for a service provider and NYC requires vehicles driving paying passengers around be less than 5 years old, and requiring drivers lease 'their' vehicle from the same company they're getting loads from. For that matter, for basic service Uber requires: "Any mid-size or full-size 4-door vehicle, in excellent condition." in other cities. You could technically pick customers up in a Model T Ford. The shipping equivalent could be something like 'DOT compliant semi capable of hauling the load'. If you have a fancy car like a Model S in NYC, you can sign up for 'uberBlack', which is for passengers wanting something fancier.
I don't read AC A human right
Monitoring and firing people based on their performance sounds like a boss/employees type of relationship. That sounds more like dealing with an underling/employee rather than partnering with an independent contractor, the term Uber usually uses to describe its relationship to the taxi drivers.
It's actually standard for contractors as well. Note that they're not monitoring performance other than by customer satisfaction - If a contractor does a shoddy job you're certainly allowed to blackball them from further contracts with you. It's also tied into their service - you can be much more certain to get a 'good' driver with Uber than with some taxi services.
I don't read AC A human right
States have their own rules which may be more stringent. Federal law sets the floor, the states set the ceiling.
When I was a contractor, my hours were fixed. I worked for one client. The price was negotiated, but I negotiate my salary the same way.
You might have a case in court then that you were actually an employee.
The real question is do you pay them by W2 or 1099?
Courts lately have been looking askance at companies essentially using contracting rules to avoid paying benefits and minimum wage to people who are effectively employees.
I don't read AC A human right
You're really confused here. That';s not surprising. This is a confusing area of law, and unlike every other area of law I have ever studied there are literally no hard and fast rules. There are no tests. there are testish principles, which re frequently combined with common sense, but if you think that there's actually some way to prove 100% beyond a doubt whether anyone anywhere in this country is definitively a contractor or an employee you're wrong.
I strongly suspect, for example, that if you hired a contractor to put in a roof and you specified not only the kind of roof you wanted him to build, but the methods used to build it, he'd be able to sue you and get employee status. He'd certainly have a better shot at winning then a lot of people who everyone thinks "of course they're not contractors," like say a star Doctor on a medical team who gets to write his own schedule and break all the damn rules because he's the only heart specialist willing to work in Akron.
To quote the IRS:
In determining whether the person providing service is an employee or an independent contractor, all information that provides evidence of the degree of control and independence must be considered.
Common Law Rules
Facts that provide evidence of the degree of control and independence fall into three categories:
1. Behavioral: Does the company control or have the right to control what the worker does and how the worker does his or her job?
2. Financial: Are the business aspects of the worker’s job controlled by the payer? (these include things like how worker is paid, whether expenses are reimbursed, who provides tools/supplies, etc.)
3. Type of Relationship: Are there written contracts or employee type benefits (i.e. pension plan, insurance, vacation pay, etc.)? Will the relationship continue and is the work performed a key aspect of the business?
Note that eBay sellers are not controlled in HOW they do their jobs. eBay has no control over their financial lives -- they probably use Paypal, but they could easily set up their own credit card contract, so eBay doesn't actually force them to use it's system. And there are no written provisions involving benefits or future work. It does force them to use a computer with somewhat modern software*, so it does somewhat fulfill the first testish thingamabob.
Also note that WHAT is done in the job is totally irrelevant. If you tell your contractor to fix your roof in a way that can only be done by one method; you have not actually told him to use that method. You did not order him to use a torch down, physics did. In theory he could create a new method to do the same thing and get paid for fulfilling the contract. Since he probably provides his own tools, has his own bank account, etc. then you also do not control his finances, so the second testish thing is also not filled. Since he only works for the duration of the contract the third is also not filled.
OTOH an Uber driver is penalized if he doesn't take a certain number of rides, and he has to accept most of the ones that come on his screen or his future work is jeopardized. This means he fulfills testish thing-a-thing more then either the contractor or the eBay seller, but not as much as most employees. Since Uber handles all the business stuff, Including leasing lots of them their cars, and insisting that they register the cars as personal vehicles (rather then commercial as the law seems to require), Uber is gonna get it's ass kicked on testish thingamabob 2 for a lot of these guys, but not others (ie: the guy who bought his car with a business loan, works for three companies, is using a registered corporation for all his Uber dealings, etc.).
The third test gets interesting. Since further work for Uber is expected there's a continuing relationship. But there's no pension or health benefits.
*I suspect XP, or a LINUX distro, with the most recent possible browser on a high-end Pentium would actually work, but it would probably suck ass, and I don't have such a machine to test with.
Businesses commonly use the independent contractor scam to steal public funds as well as stealing from an employee. The Feds have controlled the definition for years. In essence the person is an employee if the business regulates them in any way or supplies them with anything at all. As a rule businesses do control their workers. For example you are given a desk and a phone and required to be at work at 9 AM. that makes you an employee. Perhaps you are given sales leads. You are an employee. If you are truly an independent contractor you will provide your own leads, furnish your own supplies, work whatever hours you wish, and behave as you wish. And being an independent contractor you must also have a valid business license. And no,, you can not work "under" someone else's license. Workman's Comp is defrauded, mandatory federal pensions are defrauded, Unemployment compensation is defrauded. Yet this is how sick this nation is : We almost never see a business seriously punished for the crime of falsely calling someone an independent contractor. And if you are an employee you can get a lot of revenge. You cans sue. You can also refuse to terminate your contract and bind the business to catastrophic agreements. And if the business tries to shut you down ask to see the contract you supposedly signed so you can see if the termination meets the contract.
I think the point was that California favors nuts over normal people, but I could be mistaken.
You get it. California=Liberal=Socialist=GonnaRuleUsingFaultyLogicAsLongAsTheyThinkItWillBringInMoreTaxRevenues
Maybe if they were not exclusive to Uber, they might be considered non-employees. Otherwise, they are just like a pizza delivery guy, working for a pizza shop.
Nope. Uber drivers are Uber employees on a casual basis. Paid for the time they work.
It would be the same if a delivery driver worked for a pizza shop and Chinese shop next door at the same time (assuming their contract of employment permitted this). In fact in Australia, this kind of arrangement is not unusual as it allows stores to split the costs of a delivery driver.
The only reason Uber does not want its employees to be listed as employees is because it gives the drivers some rights and Uber some obligations. This isn't an issue in Australia, but what does a full time Uber driver do for health care in the US?
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
This ruling is specific to the individual and not necessarily all drivers. Two people can be doing the same job where one is a contractor and one is an employee. I believe the ruling is that the driver is an employee if the only online taxi service that work for is Uber. Another issue is that contracts have end dates. Uber's agreement does not.
PS I refuse to call it "ride sharing" because it is not.
They're definitely different in the specifics, though they're part of a trend of all kinds of share/piecework employers getting hauled into court for using piecework contracts as a subterfuge to avoid regulation. An employer can't really demand you stipulate yourself a contractor for the purposes of an employment agreement, it's not voluntary on your part and it's probably not even conscionable in many cases. You're effectively being pressured to abandon your rights under the labor code or else take a walk.
Let them eat cake!
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
That doesn't seem terribly different from someone working the checkout at Macdonalds as well as Wendys. Seems to be one of those cases of tech going "no, surely this would be impossible to deal with, we must be given an out on our obligations" *quietly whistles, hoping nobody will notice millions of employees of brick-and-mortar commerce have been dealing with this "impossible" problem for decades*
But he doesn't set his own hours - he sets his own availability with higher than normal granularity, but actual scheduling is top-down from the app (there's a limited amount of rides he's allowed to refuse, but it holds in general).
They're paid per time (or, rather, per fare, which works out to be equivalent).
Being able to sign up for other ride services doesn't seem particularly relevant, given the prevalence of multiple part-time jobs in the U.S. at this point.
They can't compete with Uber, so they're paying the legislature to outlaw their competition.
-jcr
They could compete with Uber if Uber would obey the law. They are not paying the legislature to outlaw Uber, Uber is already operating illegally in most jurisdictions. Where Uber is operating legally, the taxis are sometimes even cheaper than Uber.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
yea there not exclusive unless they chose to be they can work for all 3 of the apps.
And contractors need to take special precautions as well. Uber basically needs to work out a fixed term contract, then kick the driver off Uber for some time - it must be clearly obvious they are contractors and not employees, and are completely free to pursue other jobs in the meantime.
It's on a per-driver basis, yes, so Uber needs to make sure drivers know they cannot work for Uber for more than X months without taking time off, or finding alternate work (e.g., for Lyft) because they need to show independence from Uber.
Excellent point on the term of the contract.
I'm not sure about their contract terms, or if this is part of their general contract, or if the contract has a "right to change terms" clause on behalf of Uber.
California desperately likes to convert contractors to employees on technicalities wherever it can, and the usual target is high income contractors, since it nets them tax revenue, payment to the workers comp fund, and so on. The higher the income the contractor, the higher the take on the part of California.
They also have to be looking at the sunset provisions on the federal subsidy of the ACA, and are realizing that they are going to have to come up with that money themselves from somewhere, and given prop 13, and the commercial property tax dodge (thanks, Kaiser Family Foundation!) that makes almost all commercial property immune from having the property tax rebased, that money is not going to come from property taxes.
They are not commercial drivers. They are contractors.
They are not a taxis service. They are sharing a ride in their personal vehicle.
This is, in fact, one of the reasons I think Uber will never go "driverless cars": it will sink their rideshare-not-taxi business model, if Uber owns the vehicles.
Yes, you were an employee. Your employer simply moved tax responsibility off to you, which might have been illegal.
So who is being screwed here? Uber is happy, Uber drivers seem happy, Uber customers seem happy. The only people being screwed are the Taxi cartels who have deliberately gone out of their way to stifle competition to maintain a monopoly of poor and over-priced services. Fuck them, they deserve it.
PS I refuse to call it "ride sharing" because it is not.
Heh, I do that as well. There are other apps that expedite actual ride sharing.
I don't read AC A human right
Setting his own availability is pretty much a contractor privilege.
Normally, an employee would be paid by the hour - whether they're driving or not. An Uber driver is allowed to do anything they want while waiting for a ride to come up. He gets to chose when he'll drive.
The limit, of course, is that Uber only offers rides as they become available. So it's in a driver's best interests to be available when there's more rides. Of course, one could also make 'good' money driving only during the price-up surges with minimal time invested.
I don't read AC A human right
Except that Uber is not asking to be serviced themselves, like the homeowner is. Uber is a middleman, an agent of the person asking to be serviced.
But it's common to dictate what materials they use. Want a modified bitumen roof? If it's torch-down, then that's going to require the contractor to have certain tools. You could also mandate it's peel-and-stick (say, if the building is occupied and you don't want the fire hazard), which is dictating materials/tools.
You still have very limited control and it's regulations, which are not set by you that dictate certain aspects of the job. What you order can very well limit working methods to just one with current technology but you're still not ordering a job to be done with that method. You're just ordering the job be done.
Which means a limited number of possible browsers, which all require newer equipment, not a 25 year old computer.
Are you serious? Is your next argument that it's necessary to have a means of transportation to the work site and that that means there's no distinction between employees and contractors?
A construction contractor is often mandated to work within certain hours, can't work naked, can't smoke on the job, etc.
You said it yourself: mandated. It's not your orders the contractor complies with, it is regulations.
Selling on Amazon or Ebay requires a post-2000 browser. It doesn't work on specific browser versions. They have standards and limitations on the products they allow you to sell.
So pretty much all the limitations you're saying makes Uber drivers employees also applies to Amazon/Ebay sellers and/or construction contractors.
Repeating a bad argument doesn't make it better.
It's completely different.
You are the client and he is the contractor. The contractor can negotiate the rate and you can either agree and disagree.
In Uber's case, the 'Contractor' has no say in negotiating the rate with actual client, all rates are set by Uber.
From all above only the second one make it somewhat useful and innovative (by applying logistics software to taxi business) . I dislike red tape as everybody else and we know acts of law can be just plain stupid and wrong. I can agree license laws can be modified and upgraded but if you do not have insurance then you should be put in jail - I mean Uber management and the drivers. Cost cutting is good right? But transfer of money from everywhere to one odd place on the planet is not good for anybody except the asshat that gets the money. It is not serving the society in any meaningful way. Looking at this I would say: send judge Dredd to execute the Kalanick asshat and be done with it, The rest will comply with laws and regulations and still make their money.
it's just more evidence that the sharing economy is a scam, and moving to "independent contractors" is simply an attempt to do an end run around labor laws that haven't yet caught up to modern abuses.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Independent contracting is also a way to farm out responsibility to someone else, and avoid it yourself.
Amazon is a perfect example.
Working conditions in amazons warehouses are notoriously -AWFUL-, with numerous abuses and poor working conditions (improper climate control, no breaks, wage theft, impossible expectations, etc.)
But attempts to hold Amazon responsible for them are difficult because "technically" the warehouses are run by a 3rd party staffing company, and the workers actually are employees of that company, not of Amazon, even though Amazon owns the warehouse, owns the goods, and controls nearly every facet of their work.
And to make it even worse, most of those staffing companies are set up such that the actual workers are technically considered "temps", which exempts them from even more labor laws and protections.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
In Germany, this is called "Scheinselbständigkeit".
"controls the tools driver use, monitors their approval ratings and terminates their access to the system if their ratings fall..." So I'm a Slashdot employee now?
Assuming that the people selling on eBay work hours more or less set by eBay, use eBay-provided equipment, and are told at least in general terms what they're to sell, yes, then they're probably employees. Since Uber drivers work at their own discretion and supply their own cars, it looks an awful lot like a contract relationship to me.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
My town in CA just removed the cap on the number of taxi medallions (value just went from 993 x $140,000 to Zero) but is simultaneously not allowing Uber to pick up fares at the airport. So not always.
Paypal: We're not a bank either. (Dodges many laws about banks everywhere).
Bank: We're a bank. (Dodges many laws about banks everywhere).
Office Barbrady I call shenanigans on Uber Goddamit!!! Uber will respect my authority! Nuff Said.
Medallions should be free to licensed cab drivers based on a lottery system. They can not be sold, only returned to the city. Medallion owners would have obligations to the city concerning vehicles, routes and hours available.