5 ms·

Let’s say I’m a dry wall contractor. A general contractor comes along and offers me $20k for a job. I say “$25k?” and he says, “No, $20k.” If I take the job I

Let’s say I’m a dry wall contractor. A general contractor comes along and offers me $20k for a job. I say “$25k?” and he says, “No, $20k.” If I take the job I am not magically transformed into an employee of his, simply because I lacked the bargaining power to negotiate the rate. The reason I am still a contractor is that I have absolute control over whether to agree to do that job at that price. There are obviously lots of factors that are considered in the employee/contractor analysis. I just don’t feel that “ability to negotiate rate” is a particularly important one when “absolute ability to refuse fare” is in the picture.

pfortuny 9y ago
MMmmmh, but you do not lose your job as a dry wall contractor. You lose your “uber driver” job if you do not accept uber’s fares. What am I missing?
- regulation_d 9y ago
  As someone who hasn’t driven for Uber, I’m not sure what that looks like. What are the conditions under which you would lose you “uber driver” job?
  - codegladiator 9y ago
    Under the condition where the driver demands a higher amount of money. Or even their fair share.
- ancap 9y ago
  "Dry wall contractor" is a pretty generic job title. "Uber driver" is very specific including the "location" where the driver is working. To make the analogy fair you'd have to do have a "Dry wall contractor for Boeing" or similar.
  - regulation_d 9y ago
    Unless there are non-competes in place, the analogy is fine. You have the freedom to use the platform or to not use it, and often you have the freedom to use other platforms simultaneously.
- Someone 9y ago
  “Uber Driver” isn’t a job (in the USA; some other countries disagree); you’re a contractor, and you’re free to find customers via other means (e.g. via Lyft, paying their margins, via word-of-mouth, via your own web site, etc.) Yes, that may be hard or effectively impossible, but a bad dry wall contractor will not be able to hold his business afloat, either.
  - trsse 9y ago
    > you’re free to find customers via other means Except you aren't. In many cities it is illegal to just start taking passengers for fees.
    - Someone 9y ago
      Either Uber runs a legal business, in which case I would expect others can start similar businesses, or they don’t, in which case this is like complaining that you can’t start a local mob legally after the one you worked for kicked you out. Yes, that may be difficult, but Uber has shown it to be possible; ‘just’ find some investor with a few billion to spare, and you can do it, too. Returning to the original argument: even if Uber drivers were employees, the argument “Uber can’t kick me out because I can’t get a job as an Uber driver elsewhere” doesn’t hold water, and replacing “Uber driver” by “driver” doesn’t change that.
    - sokoloff 9y ago
      Some argue that it's illegal in many cities to just start taking Uber passengers as well.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
- hunter2_ 9y ago
  Devil's advocate: Taking the drywall job is akin to clicking the "start driving" button. Once you do either of those things (which you are entirely free to not do on a particular day with no penalty), at that point there is an agreement to try and not skip a wall here and there.
taneq 9y ago
I don't know about the U.S. but in Australia there are strict rules about 'sham contracting'. To be treated as an independent contractor you can't get more than 80% of your income from any one source. If you 'contract' to just one employer you're an employee for both tax purposes and protections.
- lykahb 9y ago
  If you drive both for Lyft and Uber your income structure may satisfy that criterion.
- maratd 9y ago
  > If you 'contract' to just one employer you're an employee for both tax purposes and protections. That's not the case in the US. Our laws bar the contractor from having set hours, a set place of work, and a myriad of other rules. So if a contractor comes in 9 to 5 and has his own desk, he'll be classified as an employee. Honestly, I would prefer a similar % rule, that seems simpler and I think would accomplish the intent far better than what we have now.
  - neaden 9y ago
    The problem with the percent rule is that people could easily fall in and out of it. If we imagine someone who is an Uber driver but also works part time as an employee at another business, depending on how many hours they get in a given week as a part time employee they could go above or below the 80% figure. From Uber's standpoint you could also have two people who each drive for 10 hours a week earning the same pay, one of whom that is the only source of income, the other it's only 20% of their income.
    - drag0nballz 9y ago
      Exactly -- and companies would not want to hire contractors because it's impossible for them to know if someone is going to be treated as an employee all of a sudden (say they hired them part-time but their other p/t gig ended). I don't know how Australia deals with this.
s73v3r_ 9y ago
Except Uber & Lyft will punish you if you turn down too many jobs. That doesn't sound like absolute control. And you never got the opportunity to try and negotiate with either company to start with.
- sokoloff 9y ago
  A subcontractor who consistently turned down construction work would also be deprioritized by a general contractor. Because Uber, Lyft, and others periodically offer different incentives in the market, I could make a case that by deciding to sign up on a specific day or respond to a specific offer, you had a chance to accept or decline the company's offer. There's nothing stopping you from reaching out to Uber or Lyft corporate and trying to negotiate your rate. I predict you won't succeed, anymore than the drywall contractor example upthread.
- hunter2_ 9y ago
  Devil's advocate: Maybe it's not each fare that's a job, but each driving session. Uber offering you a particular job is them giving you the "start driving" button, and you are free to not click it.
  - s73v3r_ 9y ago
    In the same way that I'm "free" to not go into work, I suppose. But that's ignoring the reality that one is forced to work in order to survive.
dopamean 9y ago
Where in the Uber app can drivers even attempt to negotiate their rates with Uber?

pfortuny 9y ago

MMmmmh, but you do not lose your job as a dry wall contractor. You lose your “uber driver” job if you do not accept uber’s fares. What am I missing?

regulation_d 9y ago
As someone who hasn’t driven for Uber, I’m not sure what that looks like. What are the conditions under which you would lose you “uber driver” job?
- codegladiator 9y ago
  Under the condition where the driver demands a higher amount of money. Or even their fair share.
ancap 9y ago
"Dry wall contractor" is a pretty generic job title. "Uber driver" is very specific including the "location" where the driver is working. To make the analogy fair you'd have to do have a "Dry wall contractor for Boeing" or similar.
- regulation_d 9y ago
  Unless there are non-competes in place, the analogy is fine. You have the freedom to use the platform or to not use it, and often you have the freedom to use other platforms simultaneously.
Someone 9y ago
“Uber Driver” isn’t a job (in the USA; some other countries disagree); you’re a contractor, and you’re free to find customers via other means (e.g. via Lyft, paying their margins, via word-of-mouth, via your own web site, etc.) Yes, that may be hard or effectively impossible, but a bad dry wall contractor will not be able to hold his business afloat, either.
- trsse 9y ago
  > you’re free to find customers via other means Except you aren't. In many cities it is illegal to just start taking passengers for fees.
  - Someone 9y ago
    Either Uber runs a legal business, in which case I would expect others can start similar businesses, or they don’t, in which case this is like complaining that you can’t start a local mob legally after the one you worked for kicked you out. Yes, that may be difficult, but Uber has shown it to be possible; ‘just’ find some investor with a few billion to spare, and you can do it, too. Returning to the original argument: even if Uber drivers were employees, the argument “Uber can’t kick me out because I can’t get a job as an Uber driver elsewhere” doesn’t hold water, and replacing “Uber driver” by “driver” doesn’t change that.
  - sokoloff 9y ago
    Some argue that it's illegal in many cities to just start taking Uber passengers as well.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
hunter2_ 9y ago
Devil's advocate: Taking the drywall job is akin to clicking the "start driving" button. Once you do either of those things (which you are entirely free to not do on a particular day with no penalty), at that point there is an agreement to try and not skip a wall here and there.

taneq 9y ago

I don't know about the U.S. but in Australia there are strict rules about 'sham contracting'. To be treated as an independent contractor you can't get more than 80% of your income from any one source. If you 'contract' to just one employer you're an employee for both tax purposes and protections.

lykahb 9y ago
If you drive both for Lyft and Uber your income structure may satisfy that criterion.
maratd 9y ago
> If you 'contract' to just one employer you're an employee for both tax purposes and protections. That's not the case in the US. Our laws bar the contractor from having set hours, a set place of work, and a myriad of other rules. So if a contractor comes in 9 to 5 and has his own desk, he'll be classified as an employee. Honestly, I would prefer a similar % rule, that seems simpler and I think would accomplish the intent far better than what we have now.
- neaden 9y ago
  The problem with the percent rule is that people could easily fall in and out of it. If we imagine someone who is an Uber driver but also works part time as an employee at another business, depending on how many hours they get in a given week as a part time employee they could go above or below the 80% figure. From Uber's standpoint you could also have two people who each drive for 10 hours a week earning the same pay, one of whom that is the only source of income, the other it's only 20% of their income.
  - drag0nballz 9y ago
    Exactly -- and companies would not want to hire contractors because it's impossible for them to know if someone is going to be treated as an employee all of a sudden (say they hired them part-time but their other p/t gig ended). I don't know how Australia deals with this.

s73v3r_ 9y ago

Except Uber & Lyft will punish you if you turn down too many jobs. That doesn't sound like absolute control. And you never got the opportunity to try and negotiate with either company to start with.

sokoloff 9y ago
A subcontractor who consistently turned down construction work would also be deprioritized by a general contractor. Because Uber, Lyft, and others periodically offer different incentives in the market, I could make a case that by deciding to sign up on a specific day or respond to a specific offer, you had a chance to accept or decline the company's offer. There's nothing stopping you from reaching out to Uber or Lyft corporate and trying to negotiate your rate. I predict you won't succeed, anymore than the drywall contractor example upthread.
hunter2_ 9y ago
Devil's advocate: Maybe it's not each fare that's a job, but each driving session. Uber offering you a particular job is them giving you the "start driving" button, and you are free to not click it.
- s73v3r_ 9y ago
  In the same way that I'm "free" to not go into work, I suppose. But that's ignoring the reality that one is forced to work in order to survive.

dopamean 9y ago

Where in the Uber app can drivers even attempt to negotiate their rates with Uber?