Florida Classifies Uber Driver as Employee, Says He Is Eligible for Unemployment
buzzfeed.com
buzzfeed.com
I do however think it's intentionally hazy and open to interpretation.
You can't just pick one bullet point and imply it's an open & shut case. It's a combination of factors.
If parents contract a painter to paint a mural in a child's bedroom and says specifically:
- I know you prefer acrylic paints but I specifically want latex paint
- I know your website portfolio had examples of light blue but I specifically want Pantone #2945 dark shade of blue
- I know you prefer to work 9-5 but I need you to work onsite from 5pm to 9pm because that's when I'll be home from work and can give live feedback as to how it's done
- I know that if I leave you to your own judgement, you'd prefer to paint Greek & Roman nudes but I need this room to be rated G so if you can paint a depiction of Mickey Mouse fighting Batman, that's what I'm looking for.
- ... and so on...
The homeowner can be excruciatingly specific about how & when the work is exactly performed but most reasonable people will not insist that the painter is an "employee." It takes more factors than just control of the work method.
Maybe Uber's combination of other factors does ultimately mean drivers are employees but your extraction of one IRS guideline is not convincing.
They don't actually taxi you.
Uber on the other hand, definitely has an ongoing relationship with their drivers, as well as specifying how they work in fairly detailed ways.
But Uber drivers can also have simultaneous business relationships with Lyft, and be a NY taxicab driver, and offer driving services on Craigslist, etc.
Employers such as Apple Inc or Microsoft would not tolerate an employee working simultaneously for Google Inc.
The folks contending Uber drivers are employees have valid points. However, Uber also has valid bullet points that the drivers are contractors. I don't know which way the scales tip. I guess all this dialogue in the media, the local governments, and maybe the IRS is trying to sort it out.
In contrast, Uber/Lyft drivers own/lease their own cars. Who provides the equipment to do the work is also another IRS factor.[1]
And btw, I don't think sniping with one liners that biases one viewpoint is quality discussion.
[1] see item #14: "FURNISHING OF TOOLS AND MATERIALS."
With Uber/Lift, the "driving" itself is 100% the product.
And why does the discussion continue to be "one bullet point" at a time instead of a combination of factors?
If parents provide all the equipment & materials for the babysitter (infant formula, diapers, toys, Walt Disney DVDs, etc) along with the premises to do the work (the parents' home), does that make babysitter an employee?
If a dog owner provides the leash, the pet treats, and the back yard for the pet sitter to walk and exercise the dog, should the pet sitter be classified as "employee"?
Is it one factor or a combination of factors?
The job description for a Pizza Hut driver is to drive no different to an Uber driver. Whether they are delivering pizza or people is irrelevant. It's all about the nature of the work.
No, it's not _all_ about the nature of the work. Again, that's just applying one-dimensional criteria. To re-emphasize: is the employee/contractor classification just one factor or a combination of factors?
The concept of "driving" does not automatically mean an "employee" relationship. Many (probably most) 18-wheel truck drivers are independent contractors. Many drivers of tour & charter buses are subcontractors as well. Those charter bus drivers transport people like Uber drivers too.
Likewise, the "nature of photography work" does not instantly categorize it as employee vs freelancer. Sports Illustrated had some staff/employee photographers. But National Geographic has freelance photographers.
Another most obvious example to HN would be the existence of both contract and employee programmers.
It isn't just about the "nature of work".
It isn't just about who provides the equipment.
It isn't just about who decides the hours of when the work is performed.
It's isn't just _one_ criteria.
I worked at Apple years ago and nothing was in my contract to say that I couldn't work for another company. Because we all do this when we are running startups on the side.
I worked at Apple years ago and nothing was in my contract to say that I couldn't work for another company.
It is naive to think one can work at both companies simultaneously without repercussions if the manager(s) find out. The managers would not allow an employee to have a badge to the premises and access to the employees' email system at both companies. It would be legitimate grounds for termination. The employee can't sue for wrongful termination because the concepts of "protecting proprietary information", "trade secrets" etc are well-tested and upheld in court.
An employee can certainly resign (or get fired) from one company and then work for the other company but it is unrealistic to say those companies would allow concurrent employee relationships.
If Uber is hiring drivers and treating them as employees while classifying them as contractors, that isn't special to Uber, it's just the application of the tech industry's way of doing things to taxi drivers.
As an example of how easy it is, a friend of mine is contracting long term for the government. In order to ensure he is covered and classed as a contractor, over his summer holidays he will be sub-contracting out to someone else.
Uber, Airbnb, etc. should make their slogan "Loopholes 101: Exploitation on a global scale. You do the work, we make the money. Fuck you, we don't care!"
Turning a profit does not automatically equal exploitation. How do you think companies create new jobs or make capital investments? You must think that profits are direct-deposited into the CEO's bank account, and never re-invested into technology, new jobs, or into open source software that benefits the community.
And I don't think you should be using the word "exploit" so freely. Look at the sweat shops making designer clothes--that's exploitation. Taking a transactional fee off a house rented on Airbnb?--I don't think so. What was that house doing before Airbnb? It wasn't generating any revenue. Renters were not depending on that as a primary source of income. Save your outrage for real exploitation.
Did you ever consider that maybe these contractors value a flexible work schedule more than company benefits? I assume if they become employees they will lose whatever contractor benefits they had, including the flexible work schedule. I guess what I'm saying is, you're only talking about this from one perspective. I know that as a contractor, I value my flexible hours more than I do the typical benefits packages at companies. It allows me time to care for my grandmother and take her to appointments.
"As an independent contractor with Uber, you’ve got freedom and flexibility to drive whenever you have time. Set your own schedule, so you can be there for all of life’s most important moments."
What am I missing?
Among the factors is who shoulders the financial risk. If it's not possible for you to lose money, that's one of the factors that qualifies you as an employee.
Your title or contractual relationship have nothing to do with it.
It seems that one way to deal with over-supply of drivers is to lower rate the rate even further, but they probably don't want to screw around with rates too much. Lowering them drastically might discourage drivers long-term, to the point where they find a different full-time job and swear off Uber.
The problem is that these drivers fall on both sides of the questions. Another question is if Uber drivers are employees of Uber in Florida, are taxi drivers now also employees? Many of them (that do not own their own car) are ICs too.
I'm not trying to be contentious but why does your hypothetical Uber Driver have to drive around in circle?
Can't they park somewhere, or do their daily routine and wait for the app to announce a possible passenger? Cause I've met two uber drivers before from what they've talked about they just chill around, do their daily business and if there's a lead they decide if they want to take it.
I spent a few months as a dispatcher in a taxi shop, and drivers weren't ICs, they were more like part of a b2b transaction. They rented the car and medallion from us for a flat rate for 12 hours, and could pick up whomever they wanted off the streets. When we got calls to arrange pickups, I went down the list contacting drivers until someone would take the fare. We only made money from renting the taxis to drivers.
It's also sort of hostile to take the anecdote based on personal experience and characterize it as "the distinction" (when it is just as easy to read as a description of some differences).
There are lots of reasons to criticize uber. Classifying the drivers as contractors isn't a reasonable one.
There are a mass of articles and discussion about this that shows your 'reasonable' classification is in fact 'highly contentious'.
Whatever else you say about Uber, it's pretty obvious that the contractor/employees are in a grey area where they have some traits of contractors and some traits of employees.
Yes, it can be annoying and frustrating to not know with a bright line test of executable English law code the outcome, but I can only imagine how much worse it would be if we tried to reduce every situation down to exhaustively testable 0/1 pure-white/pure-black codification.
The disambiguation is lazily evaluated (sometimes at significant expense) by the tax courts, or you can request an evaluation ahead of time in a private letter ruling (at very reasonable expense). I believe this is still better than eager/greedy evaluation of all situations.
Almost irrelevantly, I also think that Uber drivers are significantly more ICs than employees.
No, not if they're on the clock. Too many rejections and they get shown the door. In any case, this particular activity is rife in the taxi industries, with taxi drivers often refusing to pick up crappy fares.