Drivers? Never Heard of Them, Says Uber (nbcnews.com) 140
California lawmakers passed a landmark bill on Wednesday that threatens to reshape how companies like Uber and Lyft do business. The legislation, known as Assembly Bill 5 (AB5), was passed in the state Assembly and now heads to Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom's desk. From a report: Uber and Lyft maintain that AB5 won't immediately change independent contractors into employees. Tony West, Uber's chief legal officer, said on a call with reporters that the bill builds on legal tests already established in California around how drivers should be classified. West said drivers may not necessarily fall under the new rules laid out in AB5. "Under that three-part test, arguably the highest bar is that a company must prove that contractors are doing work 'outside the usual course' of its business," West said. "Several previous rulings have found that drivers' work is outside the usual course of Uber's business, which is serving as a technology platform for several different types of digital marketplaces." West said Uber intends to follow AB5 should it be put into law next year, but that it will continue to try to prove that it doesn't fall under its legal framework. "Uber is no stranger to legal battles, that's for sure," West said. "We operate in a very regulated environment, and we recognize that there will be legal challenges on all fronts much of the time."
Obligatory meme (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need to knower to driver...
Definitions (Score:3, Interesting)
It's different in every state, I believe, but in general an independant contractor is someone who:
1. Doesn't have set working hours
2. Isn't given specific direction as to how to perform their job
3. Is paid either hourly or per-job
So, I'm not sure how you can categorize a specific industry based on contractors as employees, if they fulfill the definition of a contractor in pretty much every other way.
Re:Definitions (Score:5, Insightful)
The other test is that contractors get to negotiate and set their own rates. Uber and Lyft dictate the rates.
Re:Definitions (Score:4, Insightful)
The other test is that contractors get to negotiate and set their own rates. Uber and Lyft dictate the rates.
That is true. When Uber/Lyft offer rides for a price to their drivers, if nobody accepts they increase the fare and re-offer the ride. So it's not a direct negotiation, but it's not a lot different than a bidding system for contractors, though instead of contractors offering bids, the company offers a payout.
I think stuff like this is confusing to most people. All of these processes and transactions have happened before with contractors, the only difference is that it is happening very quickly using an application, instead of people talking to each other over a phone, or standing around a hall, etc...
Re: (Score:3)
That is true. When Uber/Lyft offer rides for a price to their drivers, if nobody accepts they increase the fare and re-offer the ride.
This is handled by Lyft, not by drivers. A driver can't bid at a certain price or underbid other drivers. If I _really_ want that $5 right now, I can't just give out a ride to the airport for that price on Lyft.
Re: (Score:2)
I've hired contractors for quite a few things. I've never been required to accept their rates, and in fact I've been able to say "I'll pay you $X or I'll find another contractor" on several occasions. It's called a mutually consensual exchange.
Re: (Score:2)
right, that's the contractor negotiating with you.
Re: Definitions (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
So if I'm an independent contractor, and the person or company I'm being paid to do work for has a set rate of paying contractors $X for the job I was going to do, then they have to actually treat me as an employee?
This has all kinds of bad potential written all over it.
Hell, it means that my neighbor can't actually pay me to shovel his sidewalk in the winter, because if he does, then he has to treat me as an employee only because he's only willing to pay me a fixed amount per day that I clear his side
Re: Definitions (Score:2)
You could also argue that even uber/lyft drivers actually *should* be contractors. Almost every driver that has ever picked me up drives for both uber and lyft. They have both apps running and turn one off when they accept on the other. If you treat them like employees they presumably canâ(TM)t do that. What uber/lyft should probably do is start allowing drivers to bid on rides then they really would be contractors.
Re:Definitions (Score:5, Informative)
In Europe there's also the requirement that
A. they don't get most or all their income from a single client, and that
B. they can decide to reject or accept each job request
Technological behemoths like Amazon and Uber tend to want to micro-manage how their workers do they job so they wouldn't meet your requirement 2, and delivery or driving companies penalize workers who don't regularly accept whatever is sent to them, so they wouldn't meet requirement B.
Worker in those conditions are considered "undercover employees", who must do as their employer says but are not guaranteed a number of week hours by their employer, have safety conditions or any other perks that a labor agreement guarantees.
Re: (Score:2)
You left out several items (Score:2)
4. Has a defined task with a beginning and an end. 5. The tasks are not essential to the day to day operation of the company.
That last one is the biggy. I can contract you to build a fence to enclose the lot outside my business. I cannot contract you to build fences for my fence building company.
And this is all existing law (that's not being enforced). California's going to pass a new law to add clarity so Uber can't weasel out of it by finding a judge that sides with them.
Only since last year, and only in California (Score:4, Interesting)
The point you mention is new last year, written by a California court rather than the legislature. It applies only in California, and notably is different from the IRS test used for federal taxes. People outside of California wouldn't often reference it. (Though this is a California case).
In California, the test was the control test from Borello until the court wrote a new ABC test in Dynamex.
Historically, the distinction is because an employer is responsible for the actions of their employee, liable without need to allege negligence by the employer. One can only be liable for that which one controls, so a person is not responsible for the actions of someone they purchased services from if they don't control how those services are performed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Those are the broad strokes. The IRS has a list of 20 (informal) questions that goes into more detail: http://bridgenex.com/irs-guide... [bridgenex.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It's an app company... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I remember when Uber was sold as a Car-Pooling Apps. Where if you had to commute to work, you can find and pickup people on you way to work and they will pay you for the services, mostly as a way to cover for gas and automotive expense (during this time Gas prices were really high), the Economy was strong and most people with Cars also had decent jobs.
After the 2008 Recession started, a lot of people were out of work, so they used Uber to become more of a Taxi service as they were out of work, but could at
Re: (Score:2)
If drivers were working on the app, that would be a different story. As it is, they're just a different class of users.
I thought that Uber was in the business of losing money.
Since we see so many articles about how their drivers so underpaid that they're also losing money, I say that puts them in the same business as Uber.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought that Uber was in the business of losing money.
The unicorn strategy is get bought out by a larger company or lose money until investors figure out it's a scam. Uber might be too big to buy out.
Since we see so many articles about how their drivers so underpaid that they're also losing money, I say that puts them in the same business as Uber.
Or they're a different class of unicorn investors with all their eggs in Uber and/or Lyft.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We're see how long it takes you latch on someone else as Chris @ YouTube. Maybe CaptainDork [slashdot.org]? Stealth Finger [slashdot.org] is still selling his t-shirts.
We had private contacts with CaptainDork [slashdot.org] and Stealth Finger [slashdot.org] and they are now parts of the anti-creimer alliance so, they are allowed on Slashdot while you're not.
You've tried this many times before; wrongly assimilating your problems to others situation. They have no relevance with what we are trying to accomplish with you. Now, you are so special that at some point, you will have to deal with it. If you don't, no problems, we'll just reboot until you do e.g. re-incarnate you! CROFLOL!
Re: (Score:1)
Chris you're not getting sympathy when you try to get people to go after other users. I don't see Stealth Fingers trying to sell shirts either. You came here trying to build a brand. You lost your composure a few times, you gained a reputation for making up stories, you taunted people who disagreed with you. This is the brand you built and this is part of why so many slashdotters advocate maintaining a low profile over brand building online. Even now you attempt to get negative attention and drive
Would Uber still have a company without drivers? (Score:5, Insightful)
The guys that make angry birds are an app company because the primary source of income is from people buying an app.
Uber's primary source of income, indeed their _only_ source of income, is from transportation. Take people buying rides away and Uber doesn't exist.
The app is a means to an end, not the end itself.
Re: (Score:1)
It may be income, but it doesn't exceed expenses. Their primary source of income is free money - VC funding or otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Is mcdonalds a cash register company?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The claim was that Uber is an app company because you cant pay them without the app... that means mcdonalds is a cash register company since i cant pay them unless they have a cash register.
Try calling an Uber without using a car (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Would Microsoft still have a business without hardware? Then no, it's not a software company.
Makes as much sense as an argument.
Wrong question (Score:2)
You're doing apples and oranges. Microsoft isn't a service based company, they sell product.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, otherwise eBay sellers could be classified as employees of eBay.
Re: (Score:2)
Uber isn't an app company. That's like saying Amazon is a website. The fact that I use an app to order dog food doesn't change that the are a logistics company. (Okay, Amazon makes more money off AWS now, but that's a completely different category). I use an Uber to order a taxi. If the taxis weren't there, I wouldn't use it. See also, AirBnB is a hotel chain, and TaskRabbit is a worker placement agency.
Unforseen Effects? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
When you signed up for an account with that site, what were your intentions and expectations in return?
When people sign up with Uber or Lyft and apply to drive, their intention is to get hired and expectation is to be paid for driving people around. Uber even states: "Drive with Uber. Earn money on your schedule"
When signing up for an account on that site to submit stories, were you required to submit documents such as a driver's license, Social Security number, proof of residency, proof of insurance, etc l
Re: (Score:2)
Not filing appropriate paperwork is no way to escape labor laws.
Numbers (Score:5, Insightful)
"Several previous rulings have found that drivers' work is outside the usual course of Uber's business, which is serving as a technology platform for several different types of digital marketplaces."
If you are paying more people to drive cars than to develop apps, then driving cars is part of your usual course of business.
Re: (Score:2)
I think Uber is arguing that they are more like Ebay, they provide an app that links drivers to riders. A great many people have used this to earn a few extra bucks, and a few can even earn a living. I am not sure that makes you an employee though.
Re:Numbers (Score:4, Insightful)
eBay doesn't ask me to provide info such as my driver's license, my Social Security number, proof of residency, proof of insurance, etc. like Uber and Lyft do.
Those documents are usually required when a company wants to hire you to do a job.
Re: (Score:1)
My bank asks all those same questions when I get a car loan and I don't have an employer-employee relationship with them.
Re: (Score:2)
Not the same thing. You're expected to pay back that bank loan.
With eBay and Uber/Lyft, the money you receive is yours to keep.
Re: (Score:1)
I am not sure I understand how the direction the money travels is important. You are going to have to provide all the same general information if you win the lottery too. Many organizations use your SSN for background checks. The DMV asks for this to verify who I am, and if I am eligible to drive.
Re: (Score:2)
my Social Security number [snip] required when a company wants to hire you to do a job.
Exactly. Social Security numbers are needed for payroll and taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
Right or wrong, companies have been using SSN for identification purposes for a long time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ebay doesn't tell me what I should sell, what price I should set and what photos I should include in my listing.
Re: (Score:2)
We can go around all day with analogies, the core question is does offering a ride via Uber constitute a contract of employment. There are a lot of good arguments on both sides. We need better definitions to match the new relationships that the gig economy has created.
Re: (Score:2)
You want to put out your point of view, but you don't want anyone to post anything that may conflict with it.
That's not how debates work.
Re: (Score:2)
I think my point was that we are not going to find a perfect analogy here. The gig economy has possibly created a whole new class of worker. Workers of this sort, be it Uber, Ebay, Youtube, etc, do not fit the classic definition of an employee. What happens if I complain about Uber on Twitter, and I am banned from driving? A traditional employee has some protection, but should these folks be afforded any? What is the appropriate amount of regulation here? And before we jump on the "make them employees"
ebay let's you set your own price uber does not! (Score:2)
ebay let's you set your own price uber does not!
++Good (Score:1)
Drivers? Never Heard of Them, Says Uber... (Score:2, Funny)
Drivers? Never Heard of Them, Says Uber
That's because internally at Uber HQ the drivers are universally referred to as 'suckers'.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: feels like the walls are closing in (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Uber never thrived. It's been burning through venture capital funding like grandma at the one-armed bandit.
My kingdom for a mod point today...
Re: (Score:2)
hey that's mean, they only lost $5.2 billion in the last 3 months
The Joker in that batman movie setting fire to a mountain of money has nothing on Uber
Backlash coming (Score:2, Interesting)
People like Uber and Lyft a lot more than they like government and unions. If the government and union efforts to take away ride sharing succeed in a significant way, look for democracy to reestablish itself against this sort of government racket.
Re:Backlash coming (Score:4, Informative)
People like Uber and Lyft a lot more than they like government and unions. If the government and union efforts to take away ride sharing succeed in a significant way, look for democracy to reestablish itself against this sort of government racket.
This is the whole problem though. Lyft and Uber are not ride sharing companies. They are pseudo-taxi companies (just because they made an app to hail the cab doesn't change this fact).
It is also kind of interesting that you are advocating that democracy will "reestablish itself against this sort of government racket" when it is democracy that created both the government and union "rackets" that are putting these measures in place.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course they like Uber, Uber is selling taxi rides for below cost and people love getting services below cost.
Re: (Score:3)
The Gig Economy isn't sustainable. Normally once someone begins to be responsible for other people Children and Spouses, the need for stability and benefits become more important.
Sure a single person if times are tight they can eat ramen for a week. But to push your kids and your wife to do the same, is going to be much harder.
It doesn't even work for those venture capitalists (Score:2)
The frustrating thing is that California has to pass new laws just to get the existing laws enforced by the courts. Our courts have become hopelessly corrupt from decades of being packed with pro-corporate, political appointees.
Re: (Score:1)
That's actually backward. In this case, at least, the California Supreme Court started the ball rolling by ruling unanimously to apply the new labor rules. The bill that's just been passed is just putting that ruling into statutory law, albeit with exceptions for some professions. So if anything, the courts here in California are ahead of the elected branches of governments on this issue.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong. I pay Amazon, so I have all expectations that I am dealing with an Amazon employee. I pay Uber so I have all expectations that I am dealing with a Uber driver.
When I go to the marketplace, I pay the seller directly. When I hire labour for work, I pay that labour directly. It is all who I pay the money to, directly.
Re: (Score:3)
So if a traditional taxi company develops an app to facilitate hailing their cabs are they no longer driving services also? After all, once those traditional taxi companies have the app they could "just as easily connect homeowners with electricians".
Just because the app could be used for other purposes doesn't change the fact that Uber's and Lyft's main business is as a pseudo-taxi company.
Welcome Autonomous Autos (Score:1, Insightful)
I, for one, welcome our new autonomous driving overlords.
They are Traveling! (Score:2)
Uber considers Drivers as Customers (Score:2)
One of the accounting gimmicks both Uber and Lyft do in their financial disclosures is they consider their drivers to be their customer. This allows them to claim the full undiscounted fare as revenue and any discounts as a marketing expense. One of the many reasons I will never invest in them.
Gig Economy is Independent Contractors (Score:1)
The problem as I see it:
These jobs were truly intended to be picked up by people who needed something to fill in the gaps. Be it EXTRA money, between jobs etc. It was not the intent or hope by companies like UBER that people would use them as full time jobs. It's truly "work at your own will". Just because you choose to work the hours or schedule of a full-time type employee does not mean you are entitled to full-time benefits. If you truly need full-time employment status and benefits, spend some of y
Their eyes are SO brown. (Score:2)
Really? Why is it, then, that when I hear Uber's ads on the radio, they're always about driving for Uber?
the end of "crazy Uber people?" (Score:2)
They can just do what other tech companies do (Score:2)
Déjà vu! (Score:2)
Several previous rulings have found that drivers' work is outside the usual course of Uber's business, which is serving as a technology platform for several different types of digital marketplaces.
Does anyone remember that time that Mark Zuckerberg was like Facebook isn't a media platform? (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/11/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-is-a-technology-company-not-media-company.html) Pepperidge Farms remembers. Is there like a playbook that they pass around in Silicon Valley for when regulation is looming over them?
I noticed something funny in the reporting. (Score:2)
Which got me thinking about discussions here about how people move to big cities because they figure that's where all the jobs are.
But the
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
This isn't just about Uber. California is going after a lot of independent workers. Like hair salon workers*. But if you really want to see how the elites treat themselves, let's see how this new legislation treats law firm partnerships. I'll venture a gues that they won't be touching these.
*Washington State just recently had to back down from similar legislation. The salon workers were up in arms over the loss of their status as independents. But WA will try again. Because this isn't about what the citize
Re: (Score:3)
How many of those salon workers set their own times and prices? How many just get their appointments booked by the salon owner working the salon owner's designated hours while having to announce the days they take off way in advance?
The US hair salon business seems a massive failure of labour inspection to me.
Re: (Score:2)
How many of those salon workers set their own times and prices?
Many do. And that's what the huge protests were about in Olympia Washington when they tried to make them employees.
Re: (Score:2)
How many of those salon workers set their own times and prices?
Based on my experience, all of them. The salon owner just rents a chair, everything else is up to the stylist.
I'm not sure about chain haircut places like Schroeders (are they still around?). Those might not allow as much flexibility.
Re: (Score:2)
What would they be changing about law firm partnerships, pray tell? Partners are, for example, liable for the misdeeds of their other partners [upcounsel.com], which is one of the principal dodges of classifying rideshare drivers as independent contractors. Partnerships don't pay taxes for their partners, but they also have to pass thr
Re: (Score:2)
What would they be changing about law firm partnerships, pray tell?
Not a damned thing. And that's the point. The lawyers have things set up the way they want. But for you plebes, you've got to have an employer.
liable for the misdeeds of their other partners, which is one of the principal dodges
It's not a dodge. Attorneys have to(?) carry their own professional liability insurance. Well, not the sole proprietors, if they don't mind risking their life savings on a screw-up. Uber drivers, same thing. You insure yourself and if you get in a wreck, it's between you and your policy provider.
Re: (Score:2)
You're free to set up your own partnership with people that you you're willing to have as general partners. You'd be better off forming an LLC, and plenty of lawyers are members of LLCs.
You're essentially complaining that the plebes aren't business owners. Yep. They're not. They've chosen to sell their labor rather than start and maintain a business.