Slashdot Mirror
Uber Drivers Are Company Employees Not Self-Employed Contractors, Rules British Court (arstechnica.com)
A British court has ruled that Uber drivers have the same employment rights as other full-time employees in the country, which makes them entitled to a wide array of benefits. Ars Technica reports: The ruling (PDF) means that drivers are now entitled to earn the national minimum wage, holiday pay, sick pay, and other benefits, after the San Francisco-based taxi firm lost a case brought against them by two drivers backed by the GMB union. Uber had argued that it was a tech firm rather than a transport one, and that as its drivers were self-employed contractors it was not obliged to provide the kinds of statutory employment rights full-time workers would expect. According to the GMB, the Central London Employment Tribunal's decision will have ramifications in other industries which rely on casualized labor, and that "similar contracts masquerading as bogus self employment will all be reviewed." In the court's ruling, however, the judges insisted that "the notion that Uber in London is a mosaic of 30,000 small businesses linked by a common 'platform' is to our minds faintly ridiculous. Drivers do not and cannot negotiate with passengers... They are offered and accept trips strictly on Uber's terms." The tribunal panel reserved hefty criticism for the firm, claiming that it had used "fictions," "twisted language," and "brand new terminology" to hoodwink drivers and passengers alike. The GMB meanwhile denied that the majority of Uber drivers enjoyed the "flexibility" of their current contracts.
However, this will bring about interesting wage negotiations, in the UK and abroad.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
Dishonest employers fooling employees into thinking they're contractors has actually long been a mainstay of the technical industry. Seriously. If you think you're a contractor and are rejecting my assertion here but you still have to report to an office at a specific time determined by your employer, you're a sucker.
How the hell is working FOR Uber entrepreneurship. Can you Grow your Business?
Can you Also deal with competing Companies?
Deal Direct with Customers? Other them other services?
No You work for Uber.
Long term, drivers are irrelevant. Cars will be self driving. The interim is just the last gasp of the soon to be unemployed (and irrelevant)
What they're actually saying is that UK citizens are not free to enter into individual contracts for labor or service, they may only be employees of a business/corporation. Apparently the leaders in the UK must not believe UK citizens are intelligent enough to avoid signing themselves into slavery or something.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
It's entrepreneurship because you get to decide when, where, and how much you work.
One more nail in Uber's coffin
Legal protections don't change operations, they force the company to pay you for time spent working for them.
It's entrepreneurship because you get to decide when, where, and how much you work.
That is the definition of flexible work hours. The definition of entrepreneur is someone who establishes a business.
How the hell is working FOR Uber entrepreneurship.
Can you Grow your Business?
Can you Also deal with competing Companies?
Deal Direct with Customers? Offer them other services?
No You work for Uber.
You are making a false assumption.
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
According to the UK court so is Uber.
These are labor and employment laws. They are not a universal truth.
They vary by country, and even with in the country.
In the US miss classifying workers to what ever class allows a business to save the most money is a common infraction.
I mean really, what is the deal? Do they not provide a service that everyone enjoys and uses and a much lower rate with better service than the local taxi service that doesn't even have an app? I don't understand why drivers expect to get all these benefits for working part time, they signed on to work for them, they can get another job if they don't like the situation, or they just expect that because it's a big company they should get more? then the prices for fares will rise. I think this is more political, and the lobbyists are not getting their kickbacks like they do from local taxi companies. Change is always hard when your the one getting squeezed out..
Nice straw man. What they're saying is that if a company is benefiting from workers as if they are employees....then they're employees and should be treated as such by the company. Not prey on people desperate to make next months rent, so they spend their free time driving for Uber....even if gas and maintenance costs push their annual earnings well below minimum wage.
Nobody chooses to be a low paid serf, you Randian nutjob, any more than you've "chosen" not to be a billionaire.
Enjoy your cheap ride with your underpaid and uninsured driver who's pension you probably also have to pay from your taxes!
A look at the big picture shows that Uber isn't a cool organization out there to make things better.
The only goals is to push everyone out of the market in order to make even more profit.
The world would be better of without such predatory companies.
Not every gig is going to pay well and if you don't feel like you are being paid enough then go look for a better gig. Move. What is important is ones right to travel, not ones non-existent 'right' to a job (at least in non-communist countries). It's really that simple people.
Driving is an unskilled job and people shouldn't be expecting to get paid much for it. Uber and Lyft are obviously in it for the money- but what happens when someone comes out with a decentralized free software ('open source') app to do basically the same thing? Maybe it'll enable customers to put out a pickup point, drop off destination, and amount they are willing to pay. The app then connects them with drivers. The customers can leave reviews similar to eBay. Now who do you hold accountable for employment? The customer?
We need to eliminate stupid legislation regulating wages and employment. We don't need a nanny state and those that want one can opt into one so long as one has the freedom of travel. We don't need the government stealing from us to pay for government indoctrination facilities (in the US that would be 'public schools'), welfare, police, or any of the other things government provides. We need a free market. A truly free market (not something we have today, look at government instituted cable monopolies as an example of how government screws up the free market). The government is literally making the majority dependent on it for services that we could otherwise afford ourselves if we simply stopped having our bank accounts robbed by it. The government steals significant amounts of money from employers and employees alike. Would you give up government if your income would double? Well, that's exactly how things stand today.
If you don't want government in your life come to New Hampshire and join one of the many migrations for freedom and liberty. I want to create a free state- but we need more than the 20,000 people who have/are moving for liberty (10% have moved thus far). Won't you come join us? We're making a lot of progress with BitCoins, schooling, and in lots of other areas (ie we have elected libertarian reps).
http://www.freestateproject.org http://shiresociety.com/ http://www.freekeene.com/
But what if the business you establish is to provide a service to another company? What's the difference between someone devising a service idea on their own vs another company deciding they need someone to fulfill that service?
I can't speak to British law, but in many jurisdictions there are actually legal definitions of employment to prevent what Uber appears to be doing, namely hiring people but calling them independent contractors to evade labor laws. It isn't like this is the first time that a company has tried a contractor scam to get around minimum wage and other worker protections.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
The questions (from Synergistech Communications, which also provides additional information), with the answers in bold based on my understanding of how Uber works:
By my count the Uber-Driver relationship does not pass 4 of the tests and two more are borderline. The key point that makes the relationship tip towards employee is that the driver has no direct price control (they cannot quote a price to perform the service).
The Americas have a long history of grandiose idealists forming communities. Few of them ever lasted. Even the Mormons guaranteed Congress they would pursue polygamists to get Utah admitted as a state.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
you didn't get benefits but you got a good chunk of the pay. A lot of young guys with no need for health insurance I knew loved it because it was free money. When you're 20 there's not a lot of risk.
When the outsourcing and H-1B abuse started it changed. The employers where no longer splitting the savings from the benefits, they pocketed them all. The H-1Bs worked 60-80 hour work weeks pushing wages down since companies could cut their IT staff by 50-75% thanks to the increased productivity. Wages were depressed in a classic race to the bottom.
But the old guard that remembered the good 'ole days of contracting can't seem to recognize that. Had a nice chap today arguing with me over the hours the Indians work even while we all see the emails coming from the guys at all hours of the day.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
It's not entrepreneurship if you can not set the price of your product. It's a valid point, and that was the ruling.
the cable co's have been doing this for years with all of the subcontracted workers that are controlled way to much to be Self-Employed Contractors,
Can you Also deal with competing Companies?
Many drivers drive for both Uber and Lyft. They have both apps on their phone, and go to whichever gives them a fare first.
But what if the business you establish is to provide a service to another company? What's the difference between someone devising a service idea on their own
entrepreneur
vs another company deciding they need someone to fulfill that service?
employee
(Perhaps you could argue for franchisee, but that's not Uber either.)
There's the old saying: "Be careful what you ask for, because you might get it". The Uber drivers who want to be classified as employees may think that they are suddenly going to have all the benefits of employees with none of the disadvantages. They may be rather unhappy, when they suddenly discover that they:
- must meet productivity targets
- cannot work for the competition
- must work particular hours
- must service particular areas
- generally are told exactly what/when/how they must do their work
Drivers will be ranked by productivity, with the least productive being fired. In other words, they will be treated like employees - just like they wanted. I rather doubt that this will please most of the people who drive for Uber...
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
Hey, I think its a wonderful idea. Let them all have their way in one place without imposing their ideas on the rest of us. Except they should get no outside aid, and a fence to stop them getting out once their idea of utopia inevitably turns into a living hell. They want to learn the hard way why their ideas are regressive and were replaced millenia ago? As long as they only hurt themselves, fine by me.
It's certainly the case over here too: it's called IR35, or at least that's the segment of it which has potentially applied to me when I've been contracting.
On the off chance you're interested: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/ir...
It turns out that the part of the civil service responsible for putting legal information online is really really REALLY top notch. First thought when encountering it is "who are you and what have you done with my government??". I expect they'll be cut soon.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
That is NOT the definition of entrepeneurship, hell it's not even the primary benefit - which is 'keeping the profits'.
If you don't get to keep the profits - you are an employee not an entrepeneur. It is really that simple.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
If it's a real business, you can provide that service to more than one company.
I'm pretty sure both lyft and uber prohibit people from driving for both.
Even then, you're missing the key definition of entrepeneurship: establishing a business for proft. Uber drivers do not get to keep the profits, those go to Uber, they get a cut - which makes them employees, not owners.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Uber had argued that it was a tech firm
Could they really not have thought of a better excuse? What technology has Uber developed? They are a taxi service that uses a website and a phone app. They may have developed this website, the back end and the app themselves, but that is hardly developing technology, nor does it constitute their core business. It's like claiming they are a medical company because they have a first-aid kit in their office buildings. They are in the business of moving people in cars on an individual basis. The rest of what they do facilitates the core business (and is not that different to other taxi companies).
You are a typical American moron who's got his retarded head up his own fucking ass.
You're told when to work by the company so have zero say in your hours.
I bet you think an indentured slave is an entrepreneur too ?
Uber drivers can work when they choose, turn down jobs, get paid based on work done, and provide their own equipment. They can decide to just stop being Uber drivers or take on other work at the same.
The level of control doesn't seem substantially different from that of a franchisee for any other business.
Can't say I feel too badly for Uber here. Still, am a little concerned that this might have ramifications for other freelancers.
This has obviously nothing to do with employee rights but is a hatchet job by GMB to get rid of Uber. This will harm the drivers, it will harm the customers, only one who will gain are the unions. Shame on you UK for protecting the particular interests of certain pressure groups against your citizens.
How the hell is working FOR Uber entrepreneurship.
[...]
Can you Also deal with competing Companies?
Yes. I know some people who've worked for Uber, Lyft, Postmates, TaskRabbit, and Caviar, all at the same time.
They go online on all the apps. Then they accept requests from the highest bidder. So if Uber is surging, they shut off all their other apps. Or vice versa, if Lyft is having special boost, they shut off the Uber app. Or if TaskRabbit needs a phone repair near where they're located, they'll go do that instead because it usually pays better than Uber (assuming it's not too far).
Deal Direct with Customers?
For that, you'd need your own commercial insurance.
Uber covers you with its commercial insurance, but I doubt they would cover you if you started giving rides to people for money without going through them. The same with Lyft and all the other ones. It makes sense that they would only cover you during the time you accept requests from them.
Offer them other services?
You can give an Uber customer in your car a $50 Lyft promo code, or a Juno promo code.
Uber can't complain about that. Initially, Uber tried deactivating a driver over that, but after a lawsuit, it was found that Uber couldn't interfere since its drivers were self-employed. The same goes for tips. Uber is not longer allowed to say "No Tips Necessary" on the app for that very reason.
I think it was in "Buffett: The Making of an American Capitalist", by Roger Lowenstein, there is a sort of parable that goes something like this.
Q: How many legs would a cat have if you called its tail a leg?
A: Four. Just because you call its tail a leg doesn't make it one.
AFAIC, Uber is a cab company. It can call itself a tech company all it wants, but it provides the same service as the local Yellow Cab franchise without complying with the same regulatory process.
It's entrepreneurship because you get to decide when, where, and how much you work.
Do you have a newsletter? Your ideas are intriguing....
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
The drivers have established a business for profit - it just happens to be someone else's business idea. If the driver's weren't making profits then they wouldn't be voluntarily choosing to drive.
What's the difference between a one-man business "keeping the profits" and him paying himself a salary out of the profits?
It's bleeding cash so look to them to become more desperate as time goes on. Their model does not work. See Bloomberg: https://www.bloomberg.com/news...
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
Hey ass-hole, Uber REGULATES the drivers. This isn't some sort of app the people can use to hail rides and the passenger and rider negotiate a fare. Uber controls everything. Read the fucking ruling moron.
What's the difference between a one-man business "keeping the profits" and him paying himself a salary out of the profits?
The difference would be "where does the rest of the profit go?" At the end of the day, if the entrepreneur who pays himself a salary winds up the company, the profit he hasn't already paid out to himself is his as capital, which means the difference is pretty much minimal. That makes him an entrepreneur simultaneous to his employment, even if he draws no "entrepreneurial" income and only "employee" income. It's all a pretty academic distinction that leads to a minor difference in tax liability.
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
It's entrepreneurship because you get to decide when, where, and how much you work.
Do you have a newsletter? Your ideas are intriguing....
His newsletter is printed in a retro Roman-themed format. It's a scroll, available for your perusal in all good public restrooms....
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
liability insurance and some kind of mini wage system are needed for the fake 1099's
There needs to be some kind of mini wage so they can't be pulled under it by.
Can't be pulled down by being forced to rent / buy tools or software needed for them to work.
Can't be forced to come into some place in hopes there being work for them with them being sent home or forced to wait with no pay.
Can't be on call with you must be open to come with in a short time with no pay
Can't be forced to buy / rent uniforms.
Can't be charged pay roll fees and other back office fees.
Can't be forced to only use an very limited range of trucks / cars / other tools at there own cost.
Can't be forced to work with no / very low Mileage / parking / tolls reimbursement.
Can't be charged for any damage over any amount that would pull someone under min wage for damage to company cars / tools / lost costumers / etc.
Can't be forced to bear full liability for any lawsuits / damages to others.
Driving is an unskilled job
No. No. A thousand times no. Driving is a skill. Most people learn to do it at some point in their lives, but they're not very good at it. The standard we expect of someone who uses the roads for an hour or two a day is not what we expect of people who spend their entire working day on the roads. Considering the number of hours they're out, isn't it a bit surprising how few accidents are caused by taxi drivers? That's because in most places, there are standards for professional drivers that aren't expected of amateurs.
but what happens when someone comes out with a decentralized free software ('open source') app to do basically the same thing? Maybe it'll enable customers to put out a pickup point, drop off destination, and amount they are willing to pay. The app then connects them with drivers. The customers can leave reviews similar to eBay. Now who do you hold accountable for employment? The customer?
No, that would be an open marketplace and the drivers would be able to work as self-employed contractors. It's the negotiation, the market, that is missing in the case of Uber.
We need to eliminate stupid legislation regulating wages and employment.
Yes we do, because otherwise the desperate will drive wages down to an unsustainable level. The unregulated market becomes a tragedy-of-the-commons situation, with companies killing long-term viability in a grab for short-term competitive advantage (lower prices).
Would you give up government if your income would double? Well, that's exactly how things stand today.
But it would be pretty expensive transporting my own rubbish to the tip instead of leaving it on the kerbside to be collected... oh but wait, there wouldn't be a tip, as that's a municipal facility too. Most people would leave garbage all over the place, and in the long-term it would result in pollution of the ground. If I did try to get to the tip, I'd probably bugger up my car driving on unmaintained roads.
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
Hopefully the US will have more common sense than Britain and by US legal definition Uber drivers are contractors.
Of course this will hold true only until politicians and judges who do not believe in the rule of law decide to apply the laws in their version of law.
Hey ass-hole, Uber REGULATES the drivers. This isn't some sort of app the people can use to hail rides and the passenger and rider negotiate a fare. Uber controls everything. Read the fucking ruling moron.
As long as it's the "free market" that's shafting people, that's OK. You can double your wage by getting rid of the government that stops companies like Uber from underpaying you. So the GP seems to believe.
Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
You're writing about an article that discusses exactly this factor of British law, yet this confuses you in the first sentence of your post.
False- It's been PROVEN that many drivers actually drive at a loss very often.
And no, they are not keeping the profits. They are paid a share of the fare by the company which keeps the profits.
Somebody ELSE decides what expenses to pay, and what to measure as profit. The person who does that is the only one you can reasonably call an entrepeneur. By your logic anybody who works on commission is a business owner !
Shut the service down. Let the people let their representatives know they don't appreciate nonsense rulings like this.
The progressive paradise, nobody has a job, but everything is fair.
And the rich guy (*chuckle*) will pay for the worker's paradise.
"'m pretty sure both lyft and uber prohibit people from driving for both."
They do not. In Seattle and many other cities drivers display stickers for both and take fares from both.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
liability insurance and some kind of mini wage system are needed for the fake 1099's
There needs to be some kind of mini wage so they can't be pulled under it by.
Can't be pulled down by being forced to rent / buy tools or software needed for them to work.
Can't be forced to come into some place in hopes there being work for them with them being sent home or forced to wait with no pay.
Can't be on call with you must be open to come with in a short time with no pay
Can't be forced to buy / rent uniforms.
Can't be charged pay roll fees and other back office fees.
Can't be forced to only use an very limited range of trucks / cars / other tools at there own cost.
Can't be forced to work with no / very low Mileage / parking / tolls reimbursement.
Can't be charged for any damage over any amount that would pull someone under min wage for damage to company cars / tools / lost costumers / etc.
Can't be forced to bear full liability for any lawsuits / damages to others.
What you describe isn't a contracting gig, it's more like a full-time public-sector unionized job or a civil-service government job.
You're pretty much saying by the conditions you set that you want the same old taxi system with regular employee drivers. That's exactly what nobody, not Uber/Lyft, not the potential passengers, nor the at-will drivers, want. If they did, they'd be using/driving the existing taxi systems.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
It's entrepreneurship because you get to decide when, where, and how much you work.
Do you have a newsletter? Your ideas are intriguing....
His newsletter is printed in a retro Roman-themed format. It's a scroll, available for your perusal in all good public restrooms....
My guess he is one of the No Government and everyone is honest people, where if only there are no rules, everyone will follow the rules.
Certainly his definition of entrepreneur includes all of us.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
How the flying fuck does determining your hrs of work make it entrepreneurial?
very few people can do it, but we have literally _billions_ of Indians to choose from and we can cycle them out with impunity.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Prices will increase as a result of this nonsense.
Libertas in infinitum