4 ms·

Because shit like that is generally against the law in countries that care about workers rights. It's utterly transparent and anyone can see through it. It's th

Because shit like that is generally against the law in countries that care about workers rights. It's utterly transparent and anyone can see through it. It's the same reasons Uber aren't allowed in many European countries - at least not in the way they are in the US. You can't just claim that the people that are effectively your employees are simply contractors.

briandear 7y ago
When an Uber driver also drives for Lyft — even within the same hour, isn’t that the very definition of independent contractor?
- seppin 7y ago
  It's because Uber can't guarantee supply of rides.
heartbeats 7y ago
How does this violate the law? Could you point me to any European country with laws prohibiting this? > You can't just claim that the people that are effectively your employees are simply contractors. No, they are the employees of my subsidiary. They are entitled to all of the protections of labour law, including all the maternity leave and all that. If the subsidiary goes out of business, too bad. That's what they're for.
- scbrg 7y ago
  If this actually was a functioning way of handling the situation, every single company would be structured this way. Worker protection laws are a huge pain for employers in Sweden, so they wouldn't hesitate a second if they could work around them through such a loophole. Calling for us to point to a certain paragraph of a certain law is not really fair, because we're generally not lawyers here. Can you instead explain why all companies are not structured the way you suggest. Because all managers are idiots, or because they've realized that it's not legally sound?
  - heartbeats 7y ago
    Because it's bad PR, and because few people bother to be bold enough to innovate. Sweden, like most of Europe, is a country of conformism. There is very little innovation being conducted there, just like with the Chinese. In America, people have a long and proud tradition of coming up with Byzantine workarounds for laws. In Europe, not so much. I can't prove a negative, but you can prove a positive.

briandear 7y ago

When an Uber driver also drives for Lyft — even within the same hour, isn’t that the very definition of independent contractor?

seppin 7y ago
It's because Uber can't guarantee supply of rides.

heartbeats 7y ago

How does this violate the law? Could you point me to any European country with laws prohibiting this? > You can't just claim that the people that are effectively your employees are simply contractors. No, they are the employees of my subsidiary. They are entitled to all of the protections of labour law, including all the maternity leave and all that. If the subsidiary goes out of business, too bad. That's what they're for.

scbrg 7y ago
If this actually was a functioning way of handling the situation, every single company would be structured this way. Worker protection laws are a huge pain for employers in Sweden, so they wouldn't hesitate a second if they could work around them through such a loophole. Calling for us to point to a certain paragraph of a certain law is not really fair, because we're generally not lawyers here. Can you instead explain why all companies are not structured the way you suggest. Because all managers are idiots, or because they've realized that it's not legally sound?
- heartbeats 7y ago
  Because it's bad PR, and because few people bother to be bold enough to innovate. Sweden, like most of Europe, is a country of conformism. There is very little innovation being conducted there, just like with the Chinese. In America, people have a long and proud tradition of coming up with Byzantine workarounds for laws. In Europe, not so much. I can't prove a negative, but you can prove a positive.