6 ms·

I think the proper classification of drivers is likely an existential threat to Uber, and they are responding as such. I find it highly unlikely that a court wo

I think the proper classification of drivers is likely an existential threat to Uber, and they are responding as such. I find it highly unlikely that a court would find transportation to be outside the scope of Uber's business. Although you have to almost admire the sheer brazenness in their admission that they will not adhere to the law.

buboard 7y ago
> I find it highly unlikely that a court would find transportation to be outside the scope of Uber's business TBH considering the language of the bill, it s very plausible to say that driving people around is not "their usual course". The same way that google is not an advertiser, and airbnb is not a hotel chain.
- reaperducer 7y ago
  That's like saying Yellow Cab is not a taxi company because the drivers are independent contractors who lease their cars from the company, and it doesn't actually drive anyone around. And yes, Uber does lease cars to its drivers.
  - buboard 7y ago
    Or that e-bay is not a fashion store. (I think u re referring to a probably tiny part of uber that leases cars to drivers)
    - lonelappde 7y ago
      Ebay matches sellers (who choose what to sell) with buyers (who choose what to buy). Uber tells drivers where to go, and when, if the driver agrees to do the work. Uber regulates the kind of cars acceptable, and regulates who does the work. Your Uber driver can't subcontract the drive to another driver.
      - buboard 7y ago
        uber has in the past successfully claimed that its customers are its drivers and its users are .. its users. They classify both as clients, and it seems to have worked so far. > Your Uber driver can't subcontract the drive to another driver. Even if their ToS does not allow it , it's not the law
        reaperducer 7y ago
        Depends on where you are. Some places, it is the law. Or at least part of the terms of your ride hailing license.
      - darkwizard42 7y ago
        Uber doesn't tell drivers where to go or when, drivers are free to go whereever they like (but Uber does provide incentives and information on where demand is) Uber regulates what cars are acceptable the same way an Ebay seller has to maintain some standards in their store. Similarly Ebay also verifies that you can even be a seller on their platform, just like Uber does with background checks, DMV checks, etc. To your last point on subcontracting...I'm not even sure thats part of being a contractor or employee so its neither here nor there.
      - rrix2 7y ago
        > Your Uber driver can't subcontract the drive to another driver. Drivers can absolutely sub-contract. most choose not to in the US but it's the core of how the Uber Black business functions (a limosine company with a number of employee drivers) and is still how it meets demand in developing markets or in developing economies. https://help.uber.com/partners/article/i-want-to-become-a-fleet-partner https://help.uber.com/partners/article/i-want-to-become-a-fl...
  - chipperyman573 7y ago
    Source on uber leasing cars? I was only able to find this: https://www.uber.com/us/en/drive/vehicle-solutions/ https://www.uber.com/us/en/drive/vehicle-solutions/ which talks about paying for a rental car to uber people in
    - freehunter 7y ago
      Try this one: https://www.uber.com/gb/en/drive/vehicle-solutions/ https://www.uber.com/gb/en/drive/vehicle-solutions/
eggpy 7y ago
> you have to admire the sheer brazenness in their admission that they will not adhere to the law I mean, that has been Uber's MO since they started. AirBnB too, nothing new about this
- SauciestGNU 7y ago
  Yeah, I'm not surprised they intend to violate the law. I'm surprised that they're broadcasting their intention in advance.
  - luckydata 7y ago
    They are a public company. Not doing so could be a securities law violation.
  - AaronFriel 7y ago
    There's some nuance being lost here - they aren't saying they will violate the law, they are saying that their lawyers will advance an argument that the law (ABC test) does not apply to them. I think the legislature and many on HN believe that courts will think it's absurd that Uber's drivers are doing work "outside the usual course" of Uber's business. I'm inclined to agree, but I'm not a lawyer and I don't know how well written the law was or whether California courts will include legislative intent in applying that language.
    - shkkmo 7y ago
      The article pretty clearly states that Uber believes it will continue to pass the ABC test.
      - AaronFriel 7y ago
        You're right about the article, I was responding to people in this thread: "broadcasting their intention [to break the law] in advance", "[admitting] that they will not adhere to the law" and so on. Those are the statements I am responding to.
mbell 7y ago
The only existential threat to Uber is how long it takes self driving cars to become a reality. Human drivers are a speed bump in their business model. It only affects the length of their runway and thus when they intersect with self driving cars.

buboard 7y ago

> I find it highly unlikely that a court would find transportation to be outside the scope of Uber's business TBH considering the language of the bill, it s very plausible to say that driving people around is not "their usual course". The same way that google is not an advertiser, and airbnb is not a hotel chain.

reaperducer 7y ago
That's like saying Yellow Cab is not a taxi company because the drivers are independent contractors who lease their cars from the company, and it doesn't actually drive anyone around. And yes, Uber does lease cars to its drivers.
- buboard 7y ago
  Or that e-bay is not a fashion store. (I think u re referring to a probably tiny part of uber that leases cars to drivers)
  - lonelappde 7y ago
    Ebay matches sellers (who choose what to sell) with buyers (who choose what to buy). Uber tells drivers where to go, and when, if the driver agrees to do the work. Uber regulates the kind of cars acceptable, and regulates who does the work. Your Uber driver can't subcontract the drive to another driver.
    - buboard 7y ago
      uber has in the past successfully claimed that its customers are its drivers and its users are .. its users. They classify both as clients, and it seems to have worked so far. > Your Uber driver can't subcontract the drive to another driver. Even if their ToS does not allow it , it's not the law
      - reaperducer 7y ago
        Depends on where you are. Some places, it is the law. Or at least part of the terms of your ride hailing license.
    - darkwizard42 7y ago
      Uber doesn't tell drivers where to go or when, drivers are free to go whereever they like (but Uber does provide incentives and information on where demand is) Uber regulates what cars are acceptable the same way an Ebay seller has to maintain some standards in their store. Similarly Ebay also verifies that you can even be a seller on their platform, just like Uber does with background checks, DMV checks, etc. To your last point on subcontracting...I'm not even sure thats part of being a contractor or employee so its neither here nor there.
    - rrix2 7y ago
      > Your Uber driver can't subcontract the drive to another driver. Drivers can absolutely sub-contract. most choose not to in the US but it's the core of how the Uber Black business functions (a limosine company with a number of employee drivers) and is still how it meets demand in developing markets or in developing economies. https://help.uber.com/partners/article/i-want-to-become-a-fleet-partner https://help.uber.com/partners/article/i-want-to-become-a-fl...
- chipperyman573 7y ago
  Source on uber leasing cars? I was only able to find this: https://www.uber.com/us/en/drive/vehicle-solutions/ https://www.uber.com/us/en/drive/vehicle-solutions/ which talks about paying for a rental car to uber people in
  - freehunter 7y ago
    Try this one: https://www.uber.com/gb/en/drive/vehicle-solutions/ https://www.uber.com/gb/en/drive/vehicle-solutions/

eggpy 7y ago

> you have to admire the sheer brazenness in their admission that they will not adhere to the law I mean, that has been Uber's MO since they started. AirBnB too, nothing new about this

SauciestGNU 7y ago
Yeah, I'm not surprised they intend to violate the law. I'm surprised that they're broadcasting their intention in advance.
- luckydata 7y ago
  They are a public company. Not doing so could be a securities law violation.
- AaronFriel 7y ago
  There's some nuance being lost here - they aren't saying they will violate the law, they are saying that their lawyers will advance an argument that the law (ABC test) does not apply to them. I think the legislature and many on HN believe that courts will think it's absurd that Uber's drivers are doing work "outside the usual course" of Uber's business. I'm inclined to agree, but I'm not a lawyer and I don't know how well written the law was or whether California courts will include legislative intent in applying that language.
  - shkkmo 7y ago
    The article pretty clearly states that Uber believes it will continue to pass the ABC test.
    - AaronFriel 7y ago
      You're right about the article, I was responding to people in this thread: "broadcasting their intention [to break the law] in advance", "[admitting] that they will not adhere to the law" and so on. Those are the statements I am responding to.

mbell 7y ago

The only existential threat to Uber is how long it takes self driving cars to become a reality. Human drivers are a speed bump in their business model. It only affects the length of their runway and thus when they intersect with self driving cars.