4 ms·
This is a false choice. Drivers can be employees AND retain flexibility. Being an employee DOES NOT require (1) only full-time work, (2) fixed schedules, or (3
by panarky 7y ago
This is a false choice. Drivers can be employees AND retain flexibility.
Being an employee DOES NOT require (1) only full-time work, (2) fixed schedules, or (3) exclusivity with one company.
Being an employee DOES require employers to compensate for all work an employee performs. Drivers shouldn't have spend 20 minutes of every hour off the clock while driving to pick up riders. Drivers shouldn't have to spend 45 minutes off the clock in the airport cell phone lot waiting for their turn at the top of the queue.
If the business model only works by making people work for free, then it's necessary for the state to set minimum standards.
- RHSeeger 7y ago> Being an employee DOES NOT require (1) only full-time work, (2) fixed schedules, or (3) exclusivity with one company. > Drivers shouldn't have to spend 45 minutes off the clock in the airport cell phone lot waiting for their turn at the top of the queue. If the driver is driving for more than one company, who pays for that cell phone lot time?
- resfirestar 7y agoAssuming the post AB 5 system essentially has rideshare workers agree to take 2-4 hour "shifts" (just a guess based on the easiest adaptation and how Amazon's delivery system works), the 45 minutes of idle time would be paid for by the company the driver agreed to work the shift for. Needless to say, such a system would heavily incentivize Uber and Lyft to avoid having drivers sitting in airport lots.
- kevingadd 7y agoIn practice they just won't drive for two companies. With minimum wage / employee status that won't hurt them at all. In practice, Uber and Lyft already don't want you keeping both apps open - they encourage you to only keep their app open with incentives.
- tick_tock_tick 7y agoTechnically that's true but why would Uber/Lyft accept the overhead of workers that are not?