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.

Comments

Re:WTF????

[Lunix Nutcase]

The venture capitalists and others trying to prop up the current tech bubble. They haven't yet had enough time to cash out while leaving everyone else holding the bag of shit.

Re: WTF????

[jpapon]

It's not really that crazy when you consider their gross revenue of 10 billion, absurd profit margin (all they do I run an app, right?) and massive potential to expand into new markets.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Business model?

[phantomfive]

Please explain how implementing the medallion system was a bad law.

Because it artificially limits the number of taxis available. Furthermore those things can be super expensive.

Now, if you want to talk about licensing drivers or something like that, it's reasonable. But that's not what the medallion system does.

Re:I'd post one, but...

[tlhIngan]

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).

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.

This can mean that an Uber driver will sign in to both Uber and Lyft and choose jobs from either - while they are logged into Uber, they cannot be exclusively on "uber-only time" (since Uber doesn't consider them to be working for Uber yet).

As for taxis - remember that taxis often have limitations. E.g., you must be able to offer accessible service - if you don't, then you must arrange for accessible service. So if you're a taxi and a handicapped person hails you, and you're not accessible-equipped, the legislation often says said driver must not only hail an appropriate cab, but ALSO STAY WITH THE FARE until picked up. No "oh I didn't know you were handicapped, see ya sucker" - the driver is forced to stay with the fare until an appropriate ride is available. Plus a whole pile of other anti-discrimination and other laws.

Re:Business model?

[Anonymous Coward]

Be a bank and claim not to be.

Violate the law about banks and pretend they don't apply to you.

(Shout out to PayPal)

Seems like there is precedent for this type of behaviour.

Re:California

[__aaclcg7560]

Please educate yourself. Your ignorance of this issue is shameful.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/04/real-problem-almonds