7 ms·

U.S. Judge Rejects Uber’s Proposed $100M Settlement with Drivers

54 points by Kaedon 10y ago

dcgudeman 10y ago
"Prior to the judge’s ruling, San Francisco-based Uber indicated it had a long-term solution to the debate about driver classification: driverless vehicles. Uber said earlier Thursday it plans to begin testing autonomous vehicles in Pittsburgh as soon as this month, featuring technology that would eventually make human drivers obsolete." Well I guess that's one way to accelerate innovation lol
- tn13 10y ago
  If the human drivers become painpoint this innovation is going to go a lot faster. I think driver of the world can untie and pressurize the government to stop this innovation in infancy :P
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - hmate9 10y ago
    http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/2f/2f3640a3393b93b2fb5049e133de5addf3bef697aa7e96e11d866c2399f0b0e8.jpg http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/2f/2f3640a3393b93b2fb5049e133de5...
    - dpiers 10y ago
      This isn't the forum for memes and image replies. Tn13 may not have the best grasp of the English language, but I was able to understand what he/she said and felt they added value to the conversation. Memes do not.
      - hmate9 10y ago
        It was just some banter.
  - bitJericho 10y ago
    Stopping innovation is what I'm all about! Actually I dislike uber because of how they flout regulations and hurt workers. But if they get rid of the workers altogether, It would be hard to complain. Especially if fairs become a fraction of the price.
    - Pyxl101 10y ago
      What regulations have they flouted? I'd be interested to learn more because I hear this claim occasionally but haven't heard the details behind it. Could you share more details?
      - Aaargh20318 10y ago
        They provide a taxi service without a proper taxi license.
        Pyxl101 10y ago
        Could you be more specific? In which jurisdiction do they provide a taxi service without a license? Could you provide a source? Many (most?) jurisdictions differentiate between for-hire-vehicles and taxis, and Uber doesn't operate unlicensed taxis as far as I know. I don't want to claim to know everything about Uber - but services like their black car and UberX service are not considered taxis in most jurisdictions that I'm aware of, for a number of reasons including because they accept only rides that were arranged in advance, they have no special paint job or advertising, etc. According to Quora, Uber does operate "UberTaxis" and those are actual medallioned taxis: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-an-UberX-Uber-Black-and-Uber-Taxi https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-an-Uber... - so it seems to me that Uber's classic services were never regulated by taxi laws to begin with, and the actual taxi services they have now comply with them. I'd like to learn more about this topic though, since I find the boundary between business and law interesting in this case, so I will be glad to review further details if someone can provide them. (I have no connection to Uber nor that industry except as a once-in-a-while customer.)
        10y ago
- yladiz 10y ago
  However, you can't just put in more money into development of a technology and get linear returns. Eventually you're gonna hit diminishing returns, so there's not too much they can do to accelerate it beyond what they're already doing (except adding more researchers, possibly). I would be surprised if Uber gets very far with their autonomous vehicle testing, especially in difficult driving conditions where LIDAR and sensors don't perform so well, until they can't reliably export it to other markets. There are some of the smartest minds in the world working on this and still haven't figured it out, and Uber's researchers are no exception. And this also completely disregards the legislation side of things, which would prove to be a huge obstacle as well, even with Uber's obscene amount of money they pour into it.
  - lallysingh 10y ago
    To their advantage: 1) Plenty of cash coming in for research 2) Use to skirting laws that get in their way - so they may just start cutting back on costs later. Maybe have the human operator remote in, instead of actually sit in the car.
    - cmdrfred 10y ago
      Number 2 is a good idea until you realize most uber drivers are lower income people with relatively high latency connections. Add in that most of them will probably be on WiFi and its a non-starter.
      - lallysingh 10y ago
        I was thinking more about adding a high-quality custom a/v/control setup directly to the car, with "drivers" going to some office with a crap-ton of monitors.
        cmdrfred 10y ago
        That is a lot of trust you are putting into the cell network.
- shostack 10y ago
  In all of this I have to wonder what their drivers (current and prospective ) think of these plans.
- gerbilly 10y ago
  >it plans to begin testing autonomous vehicles in Pittsburgh How are they going to convince the owners of the autonomous vehicles to lend them their cars for free? :-) Wouldn't this change Uber, since now they'd have to make a massive capital investment to operate?
  - mtgx 10y ago
    Uber wants to own the self-driving cars, rather than use other people's cars. This does indeed change their business significantly, because now they have to buy and operate all of those cars themselves, rather than being "just an app" that takes a commission from what the drivers make. If Uber is not careful with cost management, it could very well sink the company.
    - d4rti 10y ago
      They could work with leasing companies, or even with private individuals / companies who own the vehicles and get a cut of the usage. It seems unlikely to me though.
      - toomuchtodo 10y ago
        Why partner with Uber when you can keep the margins yourself (Like GM, Ford, BMW, and Tesla, all who can build the vehicles and have signaled they will be offering autonomous vehicles). Without a factory to make their own vehicles, Uber has no advantage.
- dhoe 10y ago
  Do we have any evidence that Uber would be any good at pulling that off? So far their core competence has been finding more or less creative workarounds for local laws. That's not exactly the quality that I look for in a supplier of autonomous driving services.
- alistairSH 10y ago
  Are Uber's customers even ready for driverless taxis? It's one thing to trust your Tesla, when you're behind the wheel and can re-take control. It's another mental leap to get in the back-seat. I would be hesitant to trust a new technology developed by a company with a record of skirting laws and regulations.
serge2k 10y ago
It's 2016 and drivers have to sue to try and get basic employment benefits from a company. They have to first overcome a clause which tries to enforce mandatory arbitration to prevent class action lawsuits. I use Uber, but I don't like Uber. > Founders and investors say reclassifying contractors as employees could drive up their labor costs by at least 20%, upending their pricing models and making their services more expensive. ... too bad? > As employees they would likely have more stringent work schedules and other requirements like wearing a uniform and undergoing time-consuming training. But it's 2016. Tell them they have a cap of X hours per week and just track hours worked using your app. A uniform? Why? Time-consuming training? To do the job better? Isn't that better for everyone? > Drivers would also be allowed to post signs in their cars soliciting tips from riders. See, I think this should be the other way around. As "contractors" who is uber to tell them they can't do that? Fuck tipping though. The day I have to start giving Uber drivers tips is the day I start finding another service. Actually it's not even that, it's the convenience of the app. if I can toss in an extra little bit when I go to rate the driver I would be okay with that. I'm not subsidizing uber fares by tacking on 20%. I refuse. Raise your prices. I still don't get how uber can call their drivers contractors. edit: To clarify on the tip thing. Some guy let me take my dog (in a crate) in his van on an uber trip. Helped me get her in and out (big dog) as well. I'd be happy to give him a good tip for that. I object to the idea that adequate service deserves extra. I'd rather just pay a fair amount (probably a bit more than now really). edit the second: Wait, I thought the contractor status issue was already decided in california and uber lost? They get to pay a one time fee to get around the law?
- maccman 10y ago
  Every single taxi driver is a contractor - why do you think Uber should be different?
  - serge2k 10y ago
    I will let the state of california make my argument. https://techcrunch.com/2015/06/17/uber-drivers-deemed-employees-by-california-labor-commission/ https://techcrunch.com/2015/06/17/uber-drivers-deemed-employ...
yladiz 10y ago
So it's murky with Uber, as far as classifying the drivers as independent vs employees. On one end, the drivers work their own hours, own their own car, and are "kinda" their own boss. On the other, they have to go through mandatory training as part of their job, have to keep minimum hours on the platform to keep their job, can't solicit tips, and don't have as much freedom to decide to decline a passenger (as far as I understand Uber will lower their internal rating if they don't accept passengers, so they're penalized when they/lack freedom to decline a passenger). I don't know all of the specifics, but from what I've read Uber is taking more control from the driver than what a normal employer employing an independent contractor does and it really is hard to argue that they're fully independent contractors. There is the argument that there should be a third classification for cases like this because the employment law is outdated, but generally speaking, I would be surprised if this goes to jury that Uber would win even with their amazing counsel. If they lost this lawsuit, their main business model would be severely hurt (fully driverless cars are not realistic for multiple reasons in the next 3-5 years, let's not kid ourselves) and their valuation would take a big hit. Uber has an uphill battle with this if they have to go through the entire process, and has a lot at stake.
- CPLX 10y ago
  You list many reasons why Uber drivers might be considered employees. It's worth noting two more absolutely huge ones: they have literally no ability to set the price of their work, and no ability to subcontract it to someone else. Those are two attributes that are characteristic of employees.
  - aetherson 10y ago
    They do have the ability to subcontract it to someone else. Uber actually has some in-app facility for this -- you can sign up as like a fleet and have your employees, driving your cars, have some revenue-split with you, the owner. I drove with an Uber that had that going on. I was surprised. This was a few years ago, I suppose it's possible that they've removed it.
- Karunamon 10y ago
  For clarity: "Mandatory training": A 7 minute video explaining how the system works the first time you log in to the driver app "Minimum hours": One ride every 6 months "Cant decline": Being online in the driver app indicates willingness to drive. Going offline is two taps.

54 points by Kaedon 10y ago

"Prior to the judge’s ruling, San Francisco-based Uber indicated it had a long-term solution to the debate about driver classification: driverless vehicles. Uber said earlier Thursday it plans to begin testing autonomous vehicles in Pittsburgh as soon as this month, featuring technology that would eventually make human drivers obsolete." Well I guess that's one way to accelerate innovation lol

tn13 10y ago
If the human drivers become painpoint this innovation is going to go a lot faster. I think driver of the world can untie and pressurize the government to stop this innovation in infancy :P
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- hmate9 10y ago
  http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/2f/2f3640a3393b93b2fb5049e133de5addf3bef697aa7e96e11d866c2399f0b0e8.jpg http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/2f/2f3640a3393b93b2fb5049e133de5...
  - dpiers 10y ago
    This isn't the forum for memes and image replies. Tn13 may not have the best grasp of the English language, but I was able to understand what he/she said and felt they added value to the conversation. Memes do not.
    - hmate9 10y ago
      It was just some banter.
- bitJericho 10y ago
  Stopping innovation is what I'm all about! Actually I dislike uber because of how they flout regulations and hurt workers. But if they get rid of the workers altogether, It would be hard to complain. Especially if fairs become a fraction of the price.
  - Pyxl101 10y ago
    What regulations have they flouted? I'd be interested to learn more because I hear this claim occasionally but haven't heard the details behind it. Could you share more details?
    - Aaargh20318 10y ago
      They provide a taxi service without a proper taxi license.
      - Pyxl101 10y ago
        Could you be more specific? In which jurisdiction do they provide a taxi service without a license? Could you provide a source? Many (most?) jurisdictions differentiate between for-hire-vehicles and taxis, and Uber doesn't operate unlicensed taxis as far as I know. I don't want to claim to know everything about Uber - but services like their black car and UberX service are not considered taxis in most jurisdictions that I'm aware of, for a number of reasons including because they accept only rides that were arranged in advance, they have no special paint job or advertising, etc. According to Quora, Uber does operate "UberTaxis" and those are actual medallioned taxis: https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-an-UberX-Uber-Black-and-Uber-Taxi https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-an-Uber... - so it seems to me that Uber's classic services were never regulated by taxi laws to begin with, and the actual taxi services they have now comply with them. I'd like to learn more about this topic though, since I find the boundary between business and law interesting in this case, so I will be glad to review further details if someone can provide them. (I have no connection to Uber nor that industry except as a once-in-a-while customer.)
        10y ago
yladiz 10y ago
However, you can't just put in more money into development of a technology and get linear returns. Eventually you're gonna hit diminishing returns, so there's not too much they can do to accelerate it beyond what they're already doing (except adding more researchers, possibly). I would be surprised if Uber gets very far with their autonomous vehicle testing, especially in difficult driving conditions where LIDAR and sensors don't perform so well, until they can't reliably export it to other markets. There are some of the smartest minds in the world working on this and still haven't figured it out, and Uber's researchers are no exception. And this also completely disregards the legislation side of things, which would prove to be a huge obstacle as well, even with Uber's obscene amount of money they pour into it.
- lallysingh 10y ago
  To their advantage: 1) Plenty of cash coming in for research 2) Use to skirting laws that get in their way - so they may just start cutting back on costs later. Maybe have the human operator remote in, instead of actually sit in the car.
  - cmdrfred 10y ago
    Number 2 is a good idea until you realize most uber drivers are lower income people with relatively high latency connections. Add in that most of them will probably be on WiFi and its a non-starter.
    - lallysingh 10y ago
      I was thinking more about adding a high-quality custom a/v/control setup directly to the car, with "drivers" going to some office with a crap-ton of monitors.
      - cmdrfred 10y ago
        That is a lot of trust you are putting into the cell network.
shostack 10y ago
In all of this I have to wonder what their drivers (current and prospective ) think of these plans.
gerbilly 10y ago
>it plans to begin testing autonomous vehicles in Pittsburgh How are they going to convince the owners of the autonomous vehicles to lend them their cars for free? :-) Wouldn't this change Uber, since now they'd have to make a massive capital investment to operate?
- mtgx 10y ago
  Uber wants to own the self-driving cars, rather than use other people's cars. This does indeed change their business significantly, because now they have to buy and operate all of those cars themselves, rather than being "just an app" that takes a commission from what the drivers make. If Uber is not careful with cost management, it could very well sink the company.
  - d4rti 10y ago
    They could work with leasing companies, or even with private individuals / companies who own the vehicles and get a cut of the usage. It seems unlikely to me though.
    - toomuchtodo 10y ago
      Why partner with Uber when you can keep the margins yourself (Like GM, Ford, BMW, and Tesla, all who can build the vehicles and have signaled they will be offering autonomous vehicles). Without a factory to make their own vehicles, Uber has no advantage.
dhoe 10y ago
Do we have any evidence that Uber would be any good at pulling that off? So far their core competence has been finding more or less creative workarounds for local laws. That's not exactly the quality that I look for in a supplier of autonomous driving services.
alistairSH 10y ago
Are Uber's customers even ready for driverless taxis? It's one thing to trust your Tesla, when you're behind the wheel and can re-take control. It's another mental leap to get in the back-seat. I would be hesitant to trust a new technology developed by a company with a record of skirting laws and regulations.

serge2k 10y ago

It's 2016 and drivers have to sue to try and get basic employment benefits from a company. They have to first overcome a clause which tries to enforce mandatory arbitration to prevent class action lawsuits. I use Uber, but I don't like Uber. > Founders and investors say reclassifying contractors as employees could drive up their labor costs by at least 20%, upending their pricing models and making their services more expensive. ... too bad? > As employees they would likely have more stringent work schedules and other requirements like wearing a uniform and undergoing time-consuming training. But it's 2016. Tell them they have a cap of X hours per week and just track hours worked using your app. A uniform? Why? Time-consuming training? To do the job better? Isn't that better for everyone? > Drivers would also be allowed to post signs in their cars soliciting tips from riders. See, I think this should be the other way around. As "contractors" who is uber to tell them they can't do that? Fuck tipping though. The day I have to start giving Uber drivers tips is the day I start finding another service. Actually it's not even that, it's the convenience of the app. if I can toss in an extra little bit when I go to rate the driver I would be okay with that. I'm not subsidizing uber fares by tacking on 20%. I refuse. Raise your prices. I still don't get how uber can call their drivers contractors. edit: To clarify on the tip thing. Some guy let me take my dog (in a crate) in his van on an uber trip. Helped me get her in and out (big dog) as well. I'd be happy to give him a good tip for that. I object to the idea that adequate service deserves extra. I'd rather just pay a fair amount (probably a bit more than now really). edit the second: Wait, I thought the contractor status issue was already decided in california and uber lost? They get to pay a one time fee to get around the law?

maccman 10y ago
Every single taxi driver is a contractor - why do you think Uber should be different?
- serge2k 10y ago
  I will let the state of california make my argument. https://techcrunch.com/2015/06/17/uber-drivers-deemed-employees-by-california-labor-commission/ https://techcrunch.com/2015/06/17/uber-drivers-deemed-employ...

yladiz 10y ago

So it's murky with Uber, as far as classifying the drivers as independent vs employees. On one end, the drivers work their own hours, own their own car, and are "kinda" their own boss. On the other, they have to go through mandatory training as part of their job, have to keep minimum hours on the platform to keep their job, can't solicit tips, and don't have as much freedom to decide to decline a passenger (as far as I understand Uber will lower their internal rating if they don't accept passengers, so they're penalized when they/lack freedom to decline a passenger). I don't know all of the specifics, but from what I've read Uber is taking more control from the driver than what a normal employer employing an independent contractor does and it really is hard to argue that they're fully independent contractors. There is the argument that there should be a third classification for cases like this because the employment law is outdated, but generally speaking, I would be surprised if this goes to jury that Uber would win even with their amazing counsel. If they lost this lawsuit, their main business model would be severely hurt (fully driverless cars are not realistic for multiple reasons in the next 3-5 years, let's not kid ourselves) and their valuation would take a big hit. Uber has an uphill battle with this if they have to go through the entire process, and has a lot at stake.

CPLX 10y ago
You list many reasons why Uber drivers might be considered employees. It's worth noting two more absolutely huge ones: they have literally no ability to set the price of their work, and no ability to subcontract it to someone else. Those are two attributes that are characteristic of employees.
- aetherson 10y ago
  They do have the ability to subcontract it to someone else. Uber actually has some in-app facility for this -- you can sign up as like a fleet and have your employees, driving your cars, have some revenue-split with you, the owner. I drove with an Uber that had that going on. I was surprised. This was a few years ago, I suppose it's possible that they've removed it.
Karunamon 10y ago
For clarity: "Mandatory training": A 7 minute video explaining how the system works the first time you log in to the driver app "Minimum hours": One ride every 6 months "Cant decline": Being online in the driver app indicates willingness to drive. Going offline is two taps.