Slashdot Mirror
Uber Drivers Deemed To Be Employees By Swiss Insurance Provider (techcrunch.com)
An anonymous shares a TechCrunch article: Uber has suffered another setback to its operational model in Europe after a Swiss insurance agency ruled that Uber drivers are employees, not freelance contractors as the company claims -- meaning it must pay social security contributions. This follows a similar ruling by a UK employment tribunal in October which found that the two Uber drivers bringing the claim were employed as workers by Uber, rather than being freelance contractors. Swiss broadcaster SRF says the Suva agency made its decision on the status of Uber drivers in the market on account of their inability to set price or payment type, and because they are threatened with consequences from Uber if they do not fulfill its requirements. The Suva described its decision on the classification as a "clear conclusion." The public sector insurer is involved in determining whether workers are freelance or not as a provider of compulsory on-the-job accident insurance which is required for certain high risk professions.
Agreed with all. But I'll take a stab at those other reasons.
First, around here anyway, any "business owner" needs to have more than one client, to be able to call that business a business and pay taxes accordingly. That means that an Uber driver would need to drive for more than just Uber to be considered a driver-for-hire. It's true for bakers, and for candlestick makers around here. I can't have a programming business if I only program for one client. I used to need to prove that to my clients' accounting departments, or they'd start taxing my business revenue, as though it were personal income.
Second, Uber just set a policy of zero sexual conduct between drivers and passengers. That's not a thing that a client can do to contractors. Can certainly fire contractors for it, but can't promise passengers that contractors will do or not do anything. Can only refund payments at the Uber level. Can't even dodge paying the drivers -- because policies aren't contractual.
How'd I do?
Where I come from, cabs, and livery (airport limo) vehicles, i.e.: the vehicles themselves, have to undergo a state safety inspection every six months or N miles, whichever comes first, same as school buses and other commercial vehicles. Because without that, people and companies would cheat and cut corners: they'd be driving passengers around with bald tires, worn-out brakes, broken suspensions, etc., and the unsuspecting passengers would be put at risk by the operator's greed and laziness.
Also, the drivers themselves need to have a Public Chauffer's License, meaning (minimalist) special training, clean background (no DUIs, etc.) and periodic drug/health* testing. Again, without that, people (potential drivers) would cheat. What's the acceptable/allowable Blood Alcohal Content??
Uber seeks to outflank all of that: the vehicle condition is the subcontractor's responsibility, the drivers fitness is the subcontractor's responsibility, all Uber does is makes a profit.
My question is: how long before some front-page uber**-tragic wrongful death lawsuit drives them out of business?
* Think: diabetes and epilepsy
** OK, pun intended, mea culpa
The definition of "employee" varies by country. But in the U.S., the distinction is based more or less on who dictates how the work is done. If you give a person a task to complete, and the person is free to complete the task when and how they want (subject to a deadline and requirements), then they are a contractor. But if you dictate how or when the person has to work, then they are an employee.
So it's not just about dictating work hours. A good analogue is workers from a temp agency. The temp agency matches up temporary jobs with temporary workers, but the workers are considered employees of the temp agency. If they tried to act like Craigslist or eBay - simply providing a place for people looking for temp work and people looking to hire temp workers to meet up, and took a cut of the payment - they'd probably be classified as contractors. But when you start to meddle with the individual transactions (creating uniform pricing, dictating standards for worker behavior, etc) you're starting to encroach on employee territory.