4 ms·

>Uber just partners with lenders and dealerships In other words, the Uber drivers ("contractors") don't own their own equipment ("the car") rather Uber's partn

>Uber just partners with lenders and dealerships In other words, the Uber drivers ("contractors") don't own their own equipment ("the car") rather Uber's partners name is probably on the title. While I don't know the answer, should the evidence come out, do you think Uber is making money from their partners financing the equipment to the Uber contractors?

morgante 11y ago
> In other words, the Uber drivers ("contractors") don't own their own equipment ("the car") rather Uber's partners name is probably on the title. That's now how car financing works.
- will_brown 11y ago
  Financing your car through the company that you work for as an independent contractor it not generally how car financing works. "Tools and Materials: The furnishing of tools, materials, etc., by the employer indicates control over the worker." I think that fact that in some instances the company finances the very tools required by the contractor to perform - for this factor - suggests employee, I imagine you still don't. Luckily from the sidelines we can watch as the various levels of government (federal, state and local) begin to figure it out for all of us. Already California Labor Commissions have ruled an Uber driver as an employee (which Uber is appealing to the CA Courts, so now we will have our first taste of their opinion) and per this article some state legislatures appear to be codifying drivers for TNCs as ICs.
  - pbreit 11y ago
    I think you're pretty far off on all of this. Most Uber drivers own their own cars. Uber doesn't do any of the leasing itself, instead sending drivers to 3rd party leasing companies. Uber gets either zero or very little kickbacks since Uber's primary motivation is getting drivers in nice cars on the road. The California decision was by some employment office with no real authority on the case of a single driver and so pretty much irrelevant.
    - will_brown 11y ago
      >Uber doesn't do any of the leasing itself, instead sending drivers to 3rd party leasing companies https://get.uber.com/cl/xchange/ https://get.uber.com/cl/xchange/ or just Google it, Uber certainly did begin leasing cars. The lease payments go directly to Uber's subsidiary. >Uber gets either zero or very little kickbacks since Uber's primary motivation is getting drivers in nice cars on the road. These drivers, as independent contractors, are supposed to provide their own tools/materials to perform, not finance/lease/rent the tools from the company to perform. >The California decision was by some employment office with no real authority on the case of a single driver and so pretty much irrelevant. No real authority? I'm assuming you have never run your own company and had a former employee with a complaint with "some employment office". They found the Uber driver improperly classified as an independent contractor, as a result Uber was ordered to pay the employee's driving expenses of $1,000's. If Uber loses its appeal in court all the sudden that single case becomes precedent for all California Uber drivers.
      - ryanlol 11y ago
        >https://get.uber.com/cl/xchange/ https://get.uber.com/cl/xchange/ or just Google it, Uber certainly did begin leasing cars. The lease payments go directly to Uber's subsidiary. Seems like this discusses "XCHANGE LEASING, LLC", not "Uber Technologies, Inc" or "Uber USA, LLC". I fail to see the relevance. >These drivers, as independent contractors, are supposed to provide their own tools/materials to perform, not finance/lease/rent the tools from the company to perform. They aren't
        will_brown 11y ago
        XCHANGE LEASING, LLC is owned by Uber, but either way I am sure you still fail to see the relevance. >They aren't Maybe you should tell that to the IRS (and a few states) as that is #14 on their 20 factor test.
        ryanlol 11y ago
        XCHANGE LEASING, LLC is not directly owned by Uber. However, it's obviously indirectly controlled by them. The "They aren't" was in reference to the fact that said contractors aren't directly leasing the cars from Uber.

morgante 11y ago

> In other words, the Uber drivers ("contractors") don't own their own equipment ("the car") rather Uber's partners name is probably on the title. That's now how car financing works.

will_brown 11y ago
Financing your car through the company that you work for as an independent contractor it not generally how car financing works. "Tools and Materials: The furnishing of tools, materials, etc., by the employer indicates control over the worker." I think that fact that in some instances the company finances the very tools required by the contractor to perform - for this factor - suggests employee, I imagine you still don't. Luckily from the sidelines we can watch as the various levels of government (federal, state and local) begin to figure it out for all of us. Already California Labor Commissions have ruled an Uber driver as an employee (which Uber is appealing to the CA Courts, so now we will have our first taste of their opinion) and per this article some state legislatures appear to be codifying drivers for TNCs as ICs.
- pbreit 11y ago
  I think you're pretty far off on all of this. Most Uber drivers own their own cars. Uber doesn't do any of the leasing itself, instead sending drivers to 3rd party leasing companies. Uber gets either zero or very little kickbacks since Uber's primary motivation is getting drivers in nice cars on the road. The California decision was by some employment office with no real authority on the case of a single driver and so pretty much irrelevant.
  - will_brown 11y ago
    >Uber doesn't do any of the leasing itself, instead sending drivers to 3rd party leasing companies https://get.uber.com/cl/xchange/ https://get.uber.com/cl/xchange/ or just Google it, Uber certainly did begin leasing cars. The lease payments go directly to Uber's subsidiary. >Uber gets either zero or very little kickbacks since Uber's primary motivation is getting drivers in nice cars on the road. These drivers, as independent contractors, are supposed to provide their own tools/materials to perform, not finance/lease/rent the tools from the company to perform. >The California decision was by some employment office with no real authority on the case of a single driver and so pretty much irrelevant. No real authority? I'm assuming you have never run your own company and had a former employee with a complaint with "some employment office". They found the Uber driver improperly classified as an independent contractor, as a result Uber was ordered to pay the employee's driving expenses of $1,000's. If Uber loses its appeal in court all the sudden that single case becomes precedent for all California Uber drivers.
    - ryanlol 11y ago
      >https://get.uber.com/cl/xchange/ https://get.uber.com/cl/xchange/ or just Google it, Uber certainly did begin leasing cars. The lease payments go directly to Uber's subsidiary. Seems like this discusses "XCHANGE LEASING, LLC", not "Uber Technologies, Inc" or "Uber USA, LLC". I fail to see the relevance. >These drivers, as independent contractors, are supposed to provide their own tools/materials to perform, not finance/lease/rent the tools from the company to perform. They aren't
      - will_brown 11y ago
        XCHANGE LEASING, LLC is owned by Uber, but either way I am sure you still fail to see the relevance. >They aren't Maybe you should tell that to the IRS (and a few states) as that is #14 on their 20 factor test.
        ryanlol 11y ago
        XCHANGE LEASING, LLC is not directly owned by Uber. However, it's obviously indirectly controlled by them. The "They aren't" was in reference to the fact that said contractors aren't directly leasing the cars from Uber.