Drivers are being paid as independent contractors. Under the current Uber model, they are not independent contractors as defined by labor law (nor the IRS). Ergo, Uber is in violation of both labor law and tax regulations; if they are found to have violated IRS employee classification rules, they'll be liable for back taxes, penalties, and officers of the company can be held personally liable.
> What evidence is there that they are actually employees besides the fact that lawyers and union activists want them to be?
You must be blinded by some sort of belief that Uber is the victim here; my apologies. Employee vs independent contractor classifications can sometimes be difficult, but the gist of it is:
If you tell someone how to do the work, and you set the price, they're an employee; if you give someone the work, they set their prices, and they have control over how the work is performed, they're a contractor.
Guess which model Uber uses?
I think it is you that are blinded by your beliefs. They are not told how to do the work. Each driver chooses when they want to work and how long they work. They are free to work with whomever else they want, including other ride sharing companies at the same time.
Uber is a marketplace that brings drivers and riders together. It's not an employer because drivers have complete freedom.
I suspect Uber does not conform to either employee or contractor arrangements under current law. The employee/contractor line is blurry enough as it is.
Counting the downvotes on comments, HN has sharply taken a socialist turn and lawyers are the new superheroes saving people from Evil startups. In other news Bernie Sanders hates Uber despite using it nearly 100% of time.[1]
[1] http://thehill.com/policy/technology/250480-bernie-sanders-s...
You misspelled "labor regulations" at the end of you sentence. Labor rights > corporate rights.
Industrialists or Libertarians.