Hacker News Reader

Comment by toomuchtodo | Hacker News Reader

If you're a rideshare driver, regulations are headed to employee classification instead of contractor status due to how much control Uber has over the transaction and the work conditions (you don't get to set the price, the when, the where, or the how). If you're an employee, minimum wage requirements (and other benefits) kick in. If making minimum wage as a driver breaks Uber's model at ride prices without subsidies, the business is unsustainable (which should be no surprise to anyone; I don't think there has ever been any evidence Uber could or would be profitable).

The whole "you're an independent contractor, don't work for poverty wages if you don't want to, it's a choice" argument is almost out of runway thankfully.

View on HN

With Uber you most definitely do set the when, where, and some of the “how” (which car do you use?). You also choose the price at which you are willing to drive.

That said, employee classification at this point would probably help Uber over its competitors, because it could start setting hours for its drivers to make demand and prices more predictable. Regulatory capture benefits large companies over small ones. Uber has the operations team to make employee classification work at scale. At the edges of employee classification Uber could offer options to drivers such as a “bid” function if they wanted, with the primary result being increased friction (but perhaps increased happiness) for drivers.

IIRC aren’t there specific requirements on what make and models are acceptable for Ubers? It’s basically just a more expensive dress code.

Yes, but it's a very broad range, which gets narrower for UberSelect, Uber XL, Uber assist, Uber Comfort (my favorite Uber product), and others. If your car doesn't qualify for the given Uber offering, it's unlikely you can provide the quality/type of service that Uber guarantees its customers. So it's not really a dress code because it materially affects the customers themselves.

My understanding is that drivers absolutely do control the when and the where, as they choose their work days and hours freely and accept or refuse riders individually after knowing the pickup location.

What are the counterarguments?

> This May, California decided to adopt an employment test, also used by Illinois and New Jersey, that could bring a safety net to gig workers. Called the ABC test, it presents three pieces of criteria that a company must show in order to designate one of their workers as an independent contractor: (1) the worker must be “free from control” of the larger company, (2) the worker must provide a service that is not part of the company’s main business, and (3) the work must be a professional who has regularly offered their services to other companies.

> By that definition, virtually no Uber drivers would be considered independent contractors, unless the company can argue that transportation is not its main business. If more states adopt this standard, “that may be the only thing that can get around an ABC test,” attorney Todd Lebowitz told CNN in May. “If a ride-hailing service is a technology company, then they may still be able to meet that test. But it's going to be scrutinized a lot more closely now.”

https://theoutline.com/post/5469/uber-employees-abc-test-ins...

https://www.hrdefenseblog.com/2018/05/say-goodbye-to-indepen...

A New York appeals board also found Uber drivers to be employees for purposes of collecting unemployment insurance.

http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?m=11019126706...

You're answering the question, "what is the legal case for drivers being employees rather than contractors?"

The parent was specifically challenging your claim that drivers don't control the where or the when, which that doesn't address.

I agree that there are good points in favor of the case that they're employees, but you're overstating it when you say drivers "don't control the where or when".

My statement ("you don't get to set the price, the when, the where, or the how") was shorthand for "the worker must be “free from control” of the larger company". Apologies I wasn't more clear initially; editing my comment to bring it in line with what the statute says would remove context, so I just leave it as-is, even though I didn't comprehensively express the idea initially (which was my mistake).

So you favor comments that sound catchy at the expense of being true?

I'm sorry that's how you interpreted the intent of the comment.

So you didn't favor that phrasing because it sounded more catchy, and you weren't aware that it was false?

Do they get to set their price for the transaction, make a counter offer? Can they individually amend the work contact? They can only be open to accepting clients they cannot pick which clients to make a bid for like any independent contractor.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com