5 ms·

I'm not sure why people think that drivers for Uber & Lyft shouldn't be treated as "contractors". I know I'm in the minority on this, but to me it seems that yo

by jdhn 7y ago

I'm not sure why people think that drivers for Uber & Lyft shouldn't be treated as "contractors". I know I'm in the minority on this, but to me it seems that you can jump in and out of employment with Uber & Lyft quite easily, to the point that it does seem more like contract work. As an anecdote, I took a Lyft to the airport with someone who had stopped driving for 6 months in order to get started with a new full time job, and had just started driving again to pick up a little more cash on the side. No full time employer would tolerate a 6 month break to start up another job, and then allow you to come back.

8note 7y ago
My current full time employer would be fine with that -- specifically withing 6 months, I'd keep my RSU grants too
fungiblecog 7y ago
Contractors can set their own rates. These drivers are employees.
- gwright 7y ago
  Your conclusion presupposes that the employee/contractor dichotomy is a useful construct in its typical form. But the current dichotomy limits the freedom of individuals to contract out their labor on terms that work form them. It replaces the free choice of individuals with the "wisdom" of bureaucrats and politicians.
- listenallyall 7y ago
  Taxi drivers don't set their own rates. What's the proper categorization?
  - turc1656 7y ago
    The taxi analogy isn't the same. The rates are being set by the local government, not some non-government third-party whom they work with like perhaps the people who actually own the medallions (most are loaned out) or the people who lease out usage of the vehicles, etc. If those places were setting rates on what could be charged then I'd say there's an argument to be made. Also, let's not forget why the government put in those rules on setting the rates in the first place - consumer protection. Cabbies were routinely ripping people off. Furthermore, it's not just one thing. It's a set of criteria/tests that for certain states like CA and NJ are defined in the law. Taken in aggregate and not just on one single characteristic of the employment a determination can be made.
    - darkwizard42 7y ago
      This isn't wholesale true. Some areas are highly regulated (see Tokyo) and some are not regulated at all. Also, local government sets a MAXIMUM rate in some jurisdictions. The taxis then choose to set the rate the driver can get paid.
    - zjaffee 7y ago
      In NYC and possibly other municipalities, the government sets the minimum rate for uber/lyft. Are they more or less of a contractor then?
  - heavyset_go 7y ago
    If Uber drivers are taxi drivers, which Uber claims they aren't (they're limousine drivers legally), then they are running illegal taxi services. It seems mighty convenient to pick and choose from laws only when it suits Uber's bottom line.
- randyrand 7y ago
  Im not sure how this distinction matters. In practice contractors still have to charge market prices. I’m not going to pay 20% more for the same quality of service.
jdnenej 7y ago
At least in Australia I think someone is only a contractor if they earn income from multiple different companies. If it's all from one then they are an employee.
- drpgq 7y ago
  Seems for me every driver works for both Lyft and Uber
- rozenmd 7y ago
  Personal Services Income is great fun as a contractor (/s). Worth a read: https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Personal-services-income/ https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Personal-services-income/
- cookie_monsta 7y ago
  There are a variety of factors that the courts use to determine employment status. Single source of income isn't one https://www.fairwork.gov.au/how-we-will-help/templates-and-guides/fact-sheets/rights-and-obligations/independent-contractors-and-employees https://www.fairwork.gov.au/how-we-will-help/templates-and-g...
turc1656 7y ago
In my book, if you can't determine the price for your service, you aren't a contractor, pure and simple. Uber determines the rates, sets their fees, supplies the clients, and has rules about how many times you can skip/pass on choosing to accept a fare. Uber basically controls every aspect of the entire process but let's people choose when they want to work. That "benefit" is thrown out to drivers so that Uber can try to claim they are "contractors" because they can choose when to work. I don't think that should be the only test - and for the states that have rules on how to define such things, most of them do not have that as the only test. Plus, I work for a large corporation and there are salaried people here who choose when to work and when not to work. Mostly the sales team than anyone else but it definitely exists. Similar story for real estate agents, financial planners and investment managers, etc. They are usually salaried employees of a firm who can set their own hours.
- jeffdavis 7y ago
  Maybe the answer is that they are neither contractors nor employees in the traditionally-understood form. But the criteria have to make sense in the context of the law. For instance, "unemployment" doesn't make much sense in the context of a driver who works for Uber and Lyft. And "minimum wage" doesn't make sense if the drivers are able to decline or cancel a request. So can you be more specific about what aspects of employment should apply to an Uber driver?
  - IanCal 7y ago
    In the UK we have "employee", "worker" and "self employed" basically. They define different rights for the worker, if the company wants more control it moves things towards employee. If they want fewer responsibilities then they have to give up some control (e.g. disciplinary procedures, setting the price, etc)
- username90 7y ago
  > Uber basically controls every aspect of the entire process but let's people choose when they want to work. No, the main benefit is that Uber doesn't choose who can drive, anyone can sign up and start driving. I don't see how you can classify them as employees without Uber having any selection criteria at all for the drivers except that they have a valid drivers licence. The workers choose to work at Uber, Uber didn't choose to employ the workers since Uber is open for all.
bmm6o 7y ago
> but to me it seems that you can jump in and out of employment with Uber & Lyft quite easily, to the point that it does seem more like contract work You can't really look at one aspect of it and make a determination, it's based on several factors. The main ones that come up in this scenario are if the contractor/employee can set their own rates, and how closely management monitors how they do their job. Flexibility of employment - either in terms of scheduling or to take periods of time off - is not considered.
- 1MoreThing 7y ago
  What's the difference between setting your own rate and being offered a rate that you can choose to accept or decline? Is it the marketplace function of Uber (determining a price point between riders and drivers) that makes it different? Does being a contractor really require the ability to set a rate that no one is willing to pay?
user5994461 7y ago
I think there are plenty of low level jobs that would allow that like waiters, cleaners, construction workers, warehouse workers or delivery drivers. All jobs that are desperate for workers. It's constant shortage if you listen to the news, but when you see conditions it's more that people don't want to work there because the conditions and the pay are quite bad.

by jdhn 7y ago

8note 7y ago

My current full time employer would be fine with that -- specifically withing 6 months, I'd keep my RSU grants too

fungiblecog 7y ago

Contractors can set their own rates. These drivers are employees.

gwright 7y ago
Your conclusion presupposes that the employee/contractor dichotomy is a useful construct in its typical form. But the current dichotomy limits the freedom of individuals to contract out their labor on terms that work form them. It replaces the free choice of individuals with the "wisdom" of bureaucrats and politicians.
listenallyall 7y ago
Taxi drivers don't set their own rates. What's the proper categorization?
- turc1656 7y ago
  The taxi analogy isn't the same. The rates are being set by the local government, not some non-government third-party whom they work with like perhaps the people who actually own the medallions (most are loaned out) or the people who lease out usage of the vehicles, etc. If those places were setting rates on what could be charged then I'd say there's an argument to be made. Also, let's not forget why the government put in those rules on setting the rates in the first place - consumer protection. Cabbies were routinely ripping people off. Furthermore, it's not just one thing. It's a set of criteria/tests that for certain states like CA and NJ are defined in the law. Taken in aggregate and not just on one single characteristic of the employment a determination can be made.
  - darkwizard42 7y ago
    This isn't wholesale true. Some areas are highly regulated (see Tokyo) and some are not regulated at all. Also, local government sets a MAXIMUM rate in some jurisdictions. The taxis then choose to set the rate the driver can get paid.
  - zjaffee 7y ago
    In NYC and possibly other municipalities, the government sets the minimum rate for uber/lyft. Are they more or less of a contractor then?
- heavyset_go 7y ago
  If Uber drivers are taxi drivers, which Uber claims they aren't (they're limousine drivers legally), then they are running illegal taxi services. It seems mighty convenient to pick and choose from laws only when it suits Uber's bottom line.
randyrand 7y ago
Im not sure how this distinction matters. In practice contractors still have to charge market prices. I’m not going to pay 20% more for the same quality of service.

jdnenej 7y ago

At least in Australia I think someone is only a contractor if they earn income from multiple different companies. If it's all from one then they are an employee.

drpgq 7y ago
Seems for me every driver works for both Lyft and Uber
rozenmd 7y ago
Personal Services Income is great fun as a contractor (/s). Worth a read: https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Personal-services-income/ https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Personal-services-income/
cookie_monsta 7y ago
There are a variety of factors that the courts use to determine employment status. Single source of income isn't one https://www.fairwork.gov.au/how-we-will-help/templates-and-guides/fact-sheets/rights-and-obligations/independent-contractors-and-employees https://www.fairwork.gov.au/how-we-will-help/templates-and-g...

turc1656 7y ago

In my book, if you can't determine the price for your service, you aren't a contractor, pure and simple. Uber determines the rates, sets their fees, supplies the clients, and has rules about how many times you can skip/pass on choosing to accept a fare. Uber basically controls every aspect of the entire process but let's people choose when they want to work. That "benefit" is thrown out to drivers so that Uber can try to claim they are "contractors" because they can choose when to work. I don't think that should be the only test - and for the states that have rules on how to define such things, most of them do not have that as the only test. Plus, I work for a large corporation and there are salaried people here who choose when to work and when not to work. Mostly the sales team than anyone else but it definitely exists. Similar story for real estate agents, financial planners and investment managers, etc. They are usually salaried employees of a firm who can set their own hours.

jeffdavis 7y ago
Maybe the answer is that they are neither contractors nor employees in the traditionally-understood form. But the criteria have to make sense in the context of the law. For instance, "unemployment" doesn't make much sense in the context of a driver who works for Uber and Lyft. And "minimum wage" doesn't make sense if the drivers are able to decline or cancel a request. So can you be more specific about what aspects of employment should apply to an Uber driver?
- IanCal 7y ago
  In the UK we have "employee", "worker" and "self employed" basically. They define different rights for the worker, if the company wants more control it moves things towards employee. If they want fewer responsibilities then they have to give up some control (e.g. disciplinary procedures, setting the price, etc)
username90 7y ago
> Uber basically controls every aspect of the entire process but let's people choose when they want to work. No, the main benefit is that Uber doesn't choose who can drive, anyone can sign up and start driving. I don't see how you can classify them as employees without Uber having any selection criteria at all for the drivers except that they have a valid drivers licence. The workers choose to work at Uber, Uber didn't choose to employ the workers since Uber is open for all.

bmm6o 7y ago

> but to me it seems that you can jump in and out of employment with Uber & Lyft quite easily, to the point that it does seem more like contract work You can't really look at one aspect of it and make a determination, it's based on several factors. The main ones that come up in this scenario are if the contractor/employee can set their own rates, and how closely management monitors how they do their job. Flexibility of employment - either in terms of scheduling or to take periods of time off - is not considered.

1MoreThing 7y ago
What's the difference between setting your own rate and being offered a rate that you can choose to accept or decline? Is it the marketplace function of Uber (determining a price point between riders and drivers) that makes it different? Does being a contractor really require the ability to set a rate that no one is willing to pay?

user5994461 7y ago

I think there are plenty of low level jobs that would allow that like waiters, cleaners, construction workers, warehouse workers or delivery drivers. All jobs that are desperate for workers. It's constant shortage if you listen to the news, but when you see conditions it's more that people don't want to work there because the conditions and the pay are quite bad.