3 ms·
The whole point is that it's not a FT job. It is a full-time job in that the so-called "core" drivers drive for Uber full-time. There are a lot of part-time
by inferiorhuman 7y ago
The whole point is that it's not a FT job.
It is a full-time job in that the so-called "core" drivers drive for Uber full-time. There are a lot of part-time employees too, and they're just as deserving of minimum wage, social security contributions, workers comp insurance, unemployment insurance, health insurance, and the whole host of other benefits that come with being classed as not-a-contractor.
It's perfectly valid for people to drive when they need extra income
There've been part-time jobs with flexible schedules since before Boober was even a glimmer in Kalanick's horny eyes. The difference is that when you work as a part-timer for a real company you are subject to things like minimum wage. Driving for Uber is nowhere near as profitable as their marketing is claiming. For instance:
https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/243102-uber-fined-20-million-lying-driver-earnings-predatory-financing https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/243102-uber-fined-20-mill...
Across all of those cities less than 30% of the drivers are making what Uber claims they can make. That's before the usury that Uber engages in (20% APR on a new car lone? for fucks sake).
- manigandham 7y agoEmployee vs contractor is not about time, it's about control. You can work on a freelance project for 40 hours a week but that doesn't suddenly mean you're an employee. If you want flexibility then you're a contractor. Part-time isn't an answer because it still has the strict control of FT. Most drivers of uber want flexibility, not a job where they have to show up at certain hours. You're arguing for something without even discussing it with the people you're supposedly arguing about.