Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Limo Firm To Uber: You Misclassify Your Drivers As Contractors, Which Is Unfair (arstechnica.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the life-isn't-fair dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A Southern California limousine company sued Uber in federal court earlier this week, alleging violations of state unfair-competition laws. While a company suing Uber is not new, the proposed class-action lawsuit appears to rely on a recently decided California Supreme Court decision that makes it more difficult for companies to unilaterally declare their workers as contractors, which effectively deprives them of benefits that they would otherwise receive as employees.

In that case, known as Dynamex, the court came up with a three-part test to figure out whether companies can assert contractor status or not. The new case is called Diva Limousine v. Uber. Some legal experts say that the earlier decision in Dynamex may bolster an argument in this new case around unfair competition that has previously been difficult to win on in federal court. In short, Diva Limousine just might succeed where other federal lawsuits have failed.

69 comments

  1. This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by TechnoGrl · · Score: 2

    TECHNOLOGY; Temp Workers At Microsoft Win Lawsuit

    or Fedex...

    <a href="https://www.oasisadvantage.com/blog/risky-business-misclassifying-workers-may-be-more-costly-than-ever"> risky businessnmisclassifying workers may be more-costly-than-ever </a>

    or Mears Limousine

    <a href="https://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/os-mears-lawsuit-settlement-20180905-story.html">Mears settles lawsuit with hundreds of chauffeurs who claim they were underpaid </a>

    or Apple

    <a href="http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/217738/employee+rights+labour+relations/Staffing+Agencies+Using+Independent+Contractors+Face+Misclassification+Liability+And+Expose+Clients+To+Undue+Risks">Staffing Agencies Using Independent Contractors Face Misclassification Liability And Expose Clients To Undue Risks </a>

    --
    ----- In Your Cubicle No One Can Hear You Scream...
    1. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by TechnoGrl · · Score: 1

      sigh.... why me can no do html any more :(

      --
      ----- In Your Cubicle No One Can Hear You Scream...
    2. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      It also had the effect of ending many tech sole proprietorships. Whereas at one time I could simply bill the client for my itemized time, pay quarterly taxes, and the client would send me a 1099 each year, now the IRS scrutinizes it and companies shy away from doing this. Sure I could start an S corp but that makes tax filing more difficult that necessary and it makes negotiating contracts and T&C more difficult. I was happy with the prior arrangement.

      But thanks to rulings like these and increased Obama administration oversight, I got screwed out of a sweet deal and now go through a contract company who charges a multiplier on my time. My client now pays more than necessary to avoid a tax fight that I am being misused even though it is my choice to be a contractor.

      This big brother act pretending to protect workers is a sham. It is about making people wage slaves so taxes are paid each pay period instead of quarterly or yearly. They do not give a shit about workers at all if it does nothing to increase their power or tax revenues.

    3. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Looks fine to me, check what your posting it as (drop down next to Preview button)?

    4. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 0

      Time to reregister as NoTechGrl?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    5. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HTML is hard. Maybe ask your boyfriend for help?

    6. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by PPH · · Score: 1

      Contract the html out.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    7. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what a sexist comment...

    8. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      Somehow your less-than and greater-than delimiters were posted as their character-entity-reference equivalents in html (e.g., ampersand-lt-semicolon for less-than.) I saw this by examining the "quote parent" text. Not sure how it happened, but the relevant keys on my keyboard appear to work fine for me.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    9. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by TechnoGrl · · Score: 1

      Of course :) .

      It;s been ages since I posted a comment here - thanks :)

      --
      ----- In Your Cubicle No One Can Hear You Scream...
    10. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an independent contractor myself, you're full of shit.

      Literally nothing you said is true. I bill my clients for time. I deal with my taxes. And I do it intentionally.

      But that has absolutely ZERO to do with corps treating people who are factually employees as independent contractors.

      If the rules affected you? You're an employee, not a contractor. You never legally qualified. Obama didn't change the rules in any significant way, they just started being enforced. You didn't have a "sweet deal" - you had a shit deal. You were being fucked six ways to Sunday, the only screwing was of your heiny.

      You were never legally operating as a sole proprietorship. You were just an ordinary employee "wage slave" - but you also got fucked out of your legally entitled benefits.

      In short, you're an idiot.

    11. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      sigh.... why me can no do html any more :(

      Upper right: Click username-account-Posting-Comment Post Mode

      I usually set Plain Old Text so I don't have to deal with line breaks.

    12. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by Daralantan · · Score: 1

      No, it has to be full time employment.

    13. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by hey! · · Score: 2

      The fact that other employers lost their cases has almost no bearing on this case. In a lawsuit, specifics matter. In this case, everything depends on exactly what business Uber is *really* in.

      Uber's position amounts to this: it is NOT in the business of providing rides, it's just mediating a transaction between people who need rides and people who are willing to provide rides. Were that true, the drivers would be contractors. But their actions contradict that position in a number of ways.

      First, Uber sets the prices riders will pay. If this were a transaction between the rider and the driver, the driver would offer his services at whatever price he wanted.

      Second, Uber brands the drivers' cars; if you drive a luxury sedan it gets branded and sold to the rider as an "Uber Black". It sets minimum standards for cars. You can't pick up an Uber passenger in an old jalopy. If they were connecting riders to contractors, they could reasonably offer the riders a choice of how new or nice a car they were willing to settle for.

      Finally, it supervises and disciplines its drivers. If your rating drops below a certain level, they will call you in for a meeting or deactivate you. It'd be one thing if they deactivate drivers with very low ratings -- drivers who are dangerous or threatening. But you can get in trouble if your rating drops to 4.6 on a scale of 1 to 5.

      All this stuff suggests an effort by Uber to create, control, and market a consistent customer ride experience. In that case they're not just mediating transactions between riders and drivers, they're in the business of providing rides. That's what makes Uber drivers employees.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    14. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      This and that a UK Court said the same thing.

    15. Re:This did not work out Well For Microsoft Either by zidium · · Score: 1

      I used to be able to bold text directly, without changing any settings.

      This must be a new change.

      I could also include links, like this one to Slashdot, but not as an AC.

      I *never* worried about line breaks, either.

      --
      Slashdot Valentines Beta Massacre: iT WORKED! The boycotts killed Beta!!
  2. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Deliberately mis-classifying people as contractors is one of the biggest scams perpetrated on workers.

    There should be an even simpler test:

    If you're doing something, on a regular basis, that is part of a company's core business, you're an employee, not a contractor

    Uber's business is providing rides. If you're a driver providing rides, you're an employee.

    1. Re:Good by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 1

      That's step A) of California's test. I find that argument impossible to argue with, but I'm not a bribed politician.

    2. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uber's business is NOT "providing rides." It is "connecting riders with drivers."

      That's why this story amounts to nothing but greed and blatant featherbedding.on the limo company's part. Can't compete? Sue. It's the American way!

    3. Re:Good by olsmeister · · Score: 2

      Connecting riders with drivers. But not just any drivers. Uber's drivers.

    4. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      But it was touted as a "ride-sharing" app. It's not sharing, it's selling

      It's enabling a market to exist that's unfeasible without them (selling rides on an individual basis wasn't really possible before their app). Just like short term room rentals (outside of hotels) wasn't possible without Airbnb.

      These companies aren't being clever, they are openly flouting regulation.

    5. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is it a scam? People consider pay and benefits when they compare two options, like working for Uber or for the limo firm. If the limo firm has to spend X for benefits which have value X to the employees, then it cancels out. If they pay twice what it's worth to the employees, then they have an efficiency problem and they need to fix it.

    6. Re: Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Uhh, bullshit.

      If you pick your hours and bring your own tools, you're a contractor. If you show up on your employers hours and use his tools, You're an employee. If you can turn down tasks, you're a contractor, if you have to accept tasks, you're an employee.

      Uber is a shifty company, but their drivers are clearly contractors. They bring their own vehicle, they pick their hours, and they can turn down fares. They're clearly contractors. Limo drivers, on the other hand, work,when they're told to, drive the company's limo, and get fired immediately if they decide not to take the passengers.

    7. Re: Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only connecting riders with drivers but also setting the price

    8. Re:Good by AuMatar · · Score: 2

      If the drivers were able to price their own rides and market their own brand through the app, then you'd have a point. If they're taking the prices they're told and are treated as "an uber" rather than "BillyBob's Ride Co", then they're employees. Guess which one it is?

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    9. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most Uber drivers drive for Lyft and other services as well. Try that with your boss and you'll learn VERY quickly what the term "employee" means.

    10. Re: Good by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      So the guy that pulls a morning shift at McDonalds and stocks shelves at night at Walmart isn't an employee of both companies?

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    11. Re:Good by AuMatar · · Score: 1

      I know plenty of people with 2 jobs. Sometimes at competitors. They're still employees.

      --
      I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
    12. Re: Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shhhhh, stop using logic. It hurts their heads...and egos.

    13. Re:Good by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2, Informative

      This story is a RRSM (regularly recurring Slashdot meme), so lets get some facts straight. The IRS publishes a 20 point checklist to determine if someone should be an employee or contractor.

      Every time this story comes up (about once a month) we get people claiming that ONE of those criteria is all that matters. This is nonsense. You need to look at all 20, and even then it isn't always clear.

      There is also often an assumption that it is always "better" to be classified as an employee, and that Uber is screwing people buy not doing that. That is misleading. There are advantages and disadvantages to being either an employee or contractor.

      Here is the list:

      1. Profit or loss. Can the worker make a profit or suffer a loss as a result of the work, aside from the money
      earned from the project? (This should involve real economic risk-not just the risk of not getting paid.)
      2. Investment. Does the worker have an investment in the equipment and facilities used to do the work? (The
      greater the investment, the more likely independent contractor status.)
      3. Works for more than one firm. Does the person work for more than one company at a time? (This tends to
      indicate independent contractor status, but isn’t conclusive since employees can also work for more than one
      employer.)
      4. Services offered to the general public. Does the worker offer services to the general public?
      5. Instructions. Do you have the right to give the worker instructions about when, where, and how to work? (This
      shows control over the worker.)
      6. Training. Do you train the worker to do the job in a particular way? (Independent contractors are already
      trained.)
      7. Integration. Are the worker’s services so important to your business that they have become a necessary part of
      the business? (This may show that the worker is subject to your control.)
      8. Services rendered personally. Must the worker provide the services personally, as opposed to delegating tasks
      to someone else? (This indicates that you are interested in the methods employed, and not just the results.)
      9. Hiring assistants. Do you hire, supervise, and pay the worker’s assistants? (Independent contractors hire and
      pay their own staff.)
      10. Continuing relationship. Is there an ongoing relationship between the worker and yourself? (A relationship can
      be considered ongoing if services are performed frequently, but irregularly.)
      11. Work hours. Do you set the worker’s hours? (Independent contractors are masters of their own time.)
      12. Full-time work. Must the worker spend all of his or her time on your job? (Independent contractors choose
      when and where they will work.)
      13. Work done on premises. Must the individual work on your premises, or do you control the route or location
      where the work must be performed? (Answering no doesn’t by itself mean independent contractor status.)
      14. Sequence. Do you have the right to determine the order in which services are performed? (This shows control
      over the worker)
      15. Reports. Must the worker give you reports accounting for his or her actions? (This may show lack of
      independence)
      16. Pay Schedules. Do you pay the worker by hour, week, or month? (Independent contractors are generally paid
      by the job or commission, although by industry practice, some are paid by the hour.)
      17. Expenses. Do you pay the worker’s business or travel costs? (This tends to show control.)
      18. Tools and materials. Do you provide the worker with equipment, tools, or materials? (Independent contractors
      generally supply the materials for the job and use their own tools and equipment.)
      19. Right to fire. Can you fire the worker? (An independent contractor can’t be fired without subjecting you to the
      risk of breach of contract lawsuit.)
      20. Worker’s right to quit. Can the worker quit at any time, without incurring liability? (An independent contractor
      has a legal obligation to complete the contract.)

    14. Re:Good by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      And a Court in Great Britain said Uber drivers were in fact employees not contractors. Funny how that works, real court cases.

    15. Re:Good by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      People make less working for Uber.

    16. Re: Good by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      Tell that to a court in the UK.

    17. Re:Good by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      And a Court in Great Britain said ...

      A court ruling in the UK has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on whether Uber drivers are contractors or employees in Southern California.

    18. Re: Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As has already been pointed out to you several times, this isn't the UK.

    19. Re:Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't people work for the limo firm then? Either the Limo firm is overpaying their drivers and has every driver position filled, or working for the limo firm must have some drawbacks. Maybe they don't offer part-time and flexible schedules? If the two jobs are not exactly as desirable, then it's normal that the salaries differ.

  3. Employees don't work for 2 firms, generally by mveloso · · Score: 0, Troll

    In general, employees don't get to choose to work for two firms doing the identical job, nor can they generally choose their own hours.

    I'm not sure how the California Supreme Court came to its decisions. Maybe they used the same decision making process they used when they determined coffee causes cancer?

    1. Re:Employees don't work for 2 firms, generally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ooh, nice troll... but no. Employees work for more than one company all the time. Second, it's pretty clear from those who have worked at Uber when they decide to "choose their own hours" they somehow don't get as many customers...err, I mean... "contracted service calls".

    2. Re:Employees don't work for 2 firms, generally by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Second, it's pretty clear from those who have worked at Uber when they decide to "choose their own hours" they somehow don't get as many customers

      Is that clear? I can believe it happens, but what sort of algorithm is Uber using here? Anyone working less than 10 hours a day gets lower priority?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  4. I don't want to be an employee. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use Uber to share my car, and I want to be able to refuse rides to anyone for WHATEVER reason. Being an employee would negate that ability. I simply want Uber to be a simple matchmaking service, with no requirements on my part. Why can't I have that?

    1. Re:I don't want to be an employee. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use Uber to share my car, and I want to be able to refuse rides to anyone for WHATEVER reason. Being an employee would negate that ability. I simply want Uber to be a simple matchmaking service, with no requirements on my part. Why can't I have that?

      Because we can't always get what we want? I want to quit my job, live in an amusement park, and get blowjobs from beautiful women on demand. Why can't I have that?

    2. Re:I don't want to be an employee. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because you're not the current chief resident of the Oval Office?

  5. private cause of action??? by mschaffer · · Score: 1

    I don't know much about CA law, but not all statutory violations give rise to a private cause of action in civil court. Does the CA's "unfair labor" laws allow this? I wouldn't be surprised if this one gets thrown out.

    1. Re:private cause of action??? by phantomfive · · Score: 1
      This case is complex, and depends so heavily on technicalities of various laws and decisions that it's hard to understand without quite a bit of domain expertise. However, the article has this quote from an actual lawyer:

      Veena Dubal, a law professor at the University of California, Hastings, emailed Ars. "It seems to raise the same arguments re: unfair competition that have been raised by many cases before it. Misclassification is a sub-issue in this case. If another court finds conclusively that Uber drivers are misclassified for wage purposes, then it will become relevant."

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:private cause of action??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, after so many 'non-binding cases that only apply to a single person' all find that the same fucking thing is true, there oughta be a rule that says that at some point the sum of those equals a binding ruling that applies everywhere. Companies like Uber shouldn't be allowed to go to court and claim that the sky is potato for the nth time in a row and force everyone to spend money re-disproving that, just because Uber has the money to spend.

    3. Re: private cause of action??? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I can't help but thinking this is a really confused idea of how the law works.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  6. Definitions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the definition varies from state to state, but, in general, if you aren't required to work a certain amount per day or week, you don't have set times to start and end work, and you aren't required to follow a dress code (weird but this is often a stipulation) then you probably aren't an employee. I'm not 100% sure, but I also think there's a stipulation about how you are supposed to do your job - which I think Uber has very loose guidelines for.

    1. Re:Definitions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the definition varies from state to state, but, in general, if you aren't required to work a certain amount per day or week, you don't have set times to start and end work, and you aren't required to follow a dress code (weird but this is often a stipulation) then you probably aren't an employee. I'm not 100% sure, but I also think there's a stipulation about how you are supposed to do your job - which I think Uber has very loose guidelines for.

  7. As an engineer, I like contracting by Sim9 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I find it way preferable to take contract gigs than FTE (full time employee) gigs. Granted, the FTE gigs typically offer an order of magnitude more pay, but all that stock/equity is inevitably tied up in a year or more of service. But as a contractor, you get paid exactly for the hours you put it and can leave whenever you want. They may not let you go to the employee movie days, but I've always had the nicest bosses as a contractor (probably because they're good bosses, but they're also aware senior contractors can walk if treated very poorly).

    Best of all, the IP agreements are actually sane because you're not an employee. I hate when FTE contracts try to claim all of your side projects as the company's inventions, sometimes even retroactively.

    Anyway, I know that contracting isn't a good fit for everyone, but I hope this doesn't end make up making it harder for those who do like the contract lifestyle.

    1. Re:As an engineer, I like contracting by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      *Sigh* Because an engineer working as a contractor is the same as an Uber driver. Nice one Potsy...

  8. Degree of control by FeelGood314 · · Score: 2

    An employee has very little control of what they do. In Canada the measure of employee vs contractor considers:
    who sets the hours
    who sets the specific tasks and how they will be done
    freedom to work for other people
    who provides the office and equipment

    Uber drivers have complete freedom in all those thing except the specific tasks (even then, they could chose the route). Most of the "contractors" I know in high tech fail all those tests.

    1. Re:Degree of control by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Contractors (at least with my experience in computer consulting in the mid-2000's) in Canada also aren't permitted to stay with a specific company for longer than 39 weeks at a time. It doesn't matter if it's with one or more contracts. They must then be away for at least 13 weeks before going back.

      This is only true with the private sector. With the federal government for some reason I've seen people sign 5 year contracts and be at the same position for over 20 years as a contractor with no breaks on the contract. A company and person doing that in the private sector would have the CRA on them in no time telling them that the person was an employee.

    2. Re:Degree of control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason is that government workers/contractors generally aren't abused. They generally will obey the terms of a contract and not try to pull one over on the contractor.

      This is why I believe unionization rules need to vary by industry and type of labor. Teachers don't need unions because they're government workers (and salaried, office-type positions). Truckers, plumbers, and similar contract-type workers need it so employers won't pull shit with them. Factory workers are in-between (there's a lot of government oversight of factories these days).

  9. I'm Rich! by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    1) Hire cab.
    2) Claim driver is now my employee, since they cannot be contracting out rides.
    3) Fire driver, sell company cab assets.
    4) Profiteering!

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  10. Working for Uber = You are a Full Time Employee? by Daralantan · · Score: 1

    I've posted about this before, but I've always wondered when we see governments, employers, etc saying that Uber's employees need to have full benefits and be treated as employees..... But are they saying if you drive at all? Or is this *IF* you drive 32+ hours a week? I've known a few people that drove for Uber and they would only do 6-12 hours a week or so. I know others do a lot more, but it still seems odd to me. Are these complaints specifically for Uber drivers who work full time hours, or literally anyone who has ever driven for Uber?

  11. Typical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot Bob Loblaws as far as the eye can see, all this intelligence, millions in pay, and not one person says "Looking for a quick ride and looking for a Limo are not the same thing. These are not actual competing businesses. This is stupid."

    1. Re:Typical by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Looking for a quick ride and looking for a Limo are not the same thing. These are not actual competing businesses.

      Not every limo is a stretch limo driving partying teenagers to their prom. Some are simply nice cars taking you from the airport to your hotel, for which Uber would be considered competition.

    2. Re:Typical by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Not every limo is a stretch limo driving partying teenagers to their prom. Some are simply nice cars taking you from the airport to your hotel, for which Uber would be considered competition.

      In English (and almost all other languages), a limousine is a stretched car. It's only in German that limousine means sedan, not sure why they got that so badly wrong but they sure did.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:Typical by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 1

      Not every limo is a stretch limo driving partying teenagers to their prom. Some are simply nice cars taking you from the airport to your hotel, for which Uber would be considered competition.

      In English (and almost all other languages), a limousine is a stretched car. It's only in German that limousine means sedan, not sure why they got that so badly wrong but they sure did.

      From the same article:

      "In the U.S., Canada and Australia, 'limousine service' (also known as 'car service') is the process of pre-booked hire of any car with a driver. The car is usually a luxury car, but not necessarily a limousine."

    4. Re:Typical by Green+Mountain+Bot · · Score: 1

      Uber Black is essentially indistinguishable from a limousine service.

    5. Re:Typical by MooseTick · · Score: 1

      I live in the U.S. While most people would define a limousine as "a stretched car", they would also include limousine service as nearly any taxi-like service that isn't in a marked taxi. I've gotten several pickups to/from airports advertised as "limousine service" and its almost always a luxury car or SUV, not a 30 foot stretch vehicle with a sunroof and wet bar.

      --
      Ninjas don't carry tic tacs
  12. Lack of compensation. by mjwx · · Score: 1

    An employee has very little control of what they do. In Canada the measure of employee vs contractor considers:
    who sets the hours
    who sets the specific tasks and how they will be done
    freedom to work for other people
    who provides the office and equipment

    Uber drivers have complete freedom in all those thing except the specific tasks (even then, they could chose the route). Most of the "contractors" I know in high tech fail all those tests.

    Contractors also receive significantly higher pay to compensate for the lack job security and beneifts like paid holidays and sick days afforded to salaried workers. They're also paid significantly more as they have to pay their own tax in most countries unless the employer and contractor agree to have the employer pay tax on their behalf. That's where the contractor argument falls down for Uber. They want to pay them like min wage slaves... but treat them as if they were highly paid contractors.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    1. Re:Lack of compensation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But they're contractors because they choose to accept that pay for that particular ride, they can pick and choose which rides to accept... pay has no influence on what they're classified as. I'm a contractor on the side of my full time job and pick and choose which gigs I take based upon what they'll pay and how fun I think they'll be.

  13. Re: This did not work out Well For Microsoft Eithe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Self serving crap from you ! 96% of Uber drivers quit within a year when they tally up car depreciation and related expenses and realize they are making below minimum wage.

  14. To Limo Firm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Limo firm, do your drivers own the cars they drive people in? If the answer is yes, then clearly you mis-classify your drivers, but if the answer is no, then UBER is not in error, you are.

  15. Re: This did not work out Well For Microsoft Eithe by alcmena · · Score: 1

    Agree with parent, GP is full of shit. I've been doing 1099 contact work through a sole prop for nearly 10 years. Nothing Obama did changed that. So far, nothing Trump did affected it either.

  16. https://youtu.be/ffgTKltQtQg by ASSIYA · · Score: 1

    #banglatechaaak #cancer breast cancer awareness signs and symptoms of breast cancer cancer twenty one pilots cancer moon tarot cancer my chemical romance cancer horoscope cancer zodiac, cancer sign health, healthy junk food healthy breakfast ideas healthy lunch ideas health department healthy food near me health insurance health tips bangla language health tips bangla health tips bangla video health tips for women health tips for men health tips of the day bangla health tips 2018 bangla health tips video bangla health tips 4u bangla health tips for pregnancy bangla health tips bd bangla health tips pdf Thanks for Watching this video For More Video, Don't forget to subscribe.....

  17. you mean, the same as tech workers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gig economy? bs term for misclassified tech workers not being given proper benefits.