6 ms·

So can Uber force French drivers to work certain hours? As an American, I have poor understanding of what employment entails in the EU. If the Uber drivers are

So can Uber force French drivers to work certain hours? As an American, I have poor understanding of what employment entails in the EU. If the Uber drivers are just hourly employees, what changes for them? In the USA, you only see real employment benefits if you are a salaried employee. An hourly worker gets paid their wage and that's it (no sick days, retirement, etc).

zwieback 7y ago
I don't know if that's true. Our hourlies get benefits like health insurance, vacation, etc. Maybe not as good as salaried but it's not as clear cut as "hourly pay only."
- atomoton 7y ago
  In Ontario (at least pre-Ford) you can get full-time benefits as an hourly worker, as long as you work 40h a week or more (or maybe 35?). It's been awhile though so I'm not super confident on the details here.
  - dahfizz 7y ago
    The same is true (at least in my experience) in America. Over 40 hrs/week means the employer has to pay out extra benefits. This is also why employers do not want you to work over 39 hours if you're not salaried.
    - lotsofpulp 7y ago
      In the US, over 40 hours simply means 1.5x your regular payrate after the 40th hour, if you're "non exempt", i.e. hourly. Some employers might offer something more. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime
      - ApolloFortyNine 7y ago
        If the company has more than 50 employees they are required to pay for healthcare if you work more than 30 hours a week [1]. https://www.employmentlawhandbook.com/federal-employment-and-labor-laws/aca/ https://www.employmentlawhandbook.com/federal-employment-and...
  - freepor 7y ago
    Which is why so many people are on 29/34/39 hour schedules.
    - CydeWeys 7y ago
      Yeah, this is why, like so many other things involving regulation, there should be a gradual proportional phase-out, not a hard line in the sand. So rather than paying two people to do 20 hours each and pay for no benefits, if you did that, you'd be paying for half benefits for each, at which point you may as well just have one person doing 40 hours a week who's fully employed and getting full benefits like you should've been doing all along.
- dahfizz 7y ago
  What does paid time off even look like if you don't have a set schedule, though? Will Uber drivers just get n hours of wage added to their paycheck every month?
  - chrisseaton 7y ago
    I work for an organisation on a contract of as many hours as I want, and I just get paid pro-rata for days off. It’s effectively just extra pay.
  - tyfon 7y ago
    Where I live the company has to set aside 12.5% of the salary paid for next years "vacation money". You can chose yourself when to withdraw this money in the following year. For a full time job you are required to take 25 days (or 5 weeks) off work outside of public holidays which is about 10% of the total working time so you usually have a bit more to spend in this period even if the vacation itself is unpaid :)
    - fastball 7y ago
      Why not just pay them more? Seems like a convoluted way to structure a pay increase.
      - tyfon 7y ago
        Because then you would have a bunch of people without money in the vacation month ;) I'd be able to manage it personally but you will find that a lot of people wouldn't..
        fastball 7y ago
        I find the idea of legislating how businesses operate based on the idea that people aren't expected to have personal responsibility highly distasteful.
        7y ago
- munk-a 7y ago
  In America very few of those (except health insurance) are actually mandated by the government. Sadly in the US most employment benefits are only exchanged at the grace of the employer.
MaupitiBlue 7y ago
You’re almost completely wrong. Legally, wether you’re an employee or independent contractor matters for everything from the Americans With Disabilities Act through Workers Compensation, not to mention, taxes. Wether the company offers benefits to hourly employees is largely an internal decision.
tasogare 7y ago
If you’re an employee you benefit healthcare, retirement etc. As I understand it, the basic week of work is 35h. You do do less if part-time. Employers also use "cadre" (white collar) contract for more qualified workers they want to milk more than the legal 35h.
Frenziefrenz 7y ago
Such an all or nothing approach sounds slightly peculiar, to put it in the nicest terms possible.
codegeek 7y ago
Hourly in US can also get benefits depending on company's discretion and some mandatory laws. For example, state of NJ has a sick day law that was passed in late 2018 where it made mandatory for employers to provide accrued sick leave to any employee (salaried or hourly) as long as they are on W-2.
smcphile 7y ago
In France, by law hourly employees get medical insurance, a certain amount of paid sick leave, unemployment insurance and also contribute to a pension plan. These benefits are partially paid for by the worker and partially paid for by the employer. Hourly workers must also be paid at least a minimum net wage (after deductions for benefits), currently 7.82 euros per hour. Contract workers pay for their benefits themselves. They’re legally required to pay into the national health insurance plan and to make payments into a pension plan, but the rest is optional. There is no required minimum wage. Whether it’s better to work as an hourly worker or as a contract worker essentially depends on how much you’re making in each case.
GuB-42 7y ago
In France, there are 3 conditions that make you an employee: - pay - work - subordination The first two are relatively straightforward: you get paid to do work. They are important in order to distinguish between volunteers and employees. Obviously, Uber drivers are working for money, it matches. The last part is the most important. It means that the employer has power over the employee, as in: give orders, and punishment if the orders are not followed. If the employer can make decisions unilaterally and at any time, there is subordination, even if there are no fixed work hours and no constant supervision. It is a very commonly broken law in France, at least in spirit.
- blaser-waffle 7y ago
  It's a commonly broken law in a lot of places. Source: lived and worked in Australia, Canada, and the US.
- bsaul 7y ago
  Subordination is extremely weird, because one could argue this is also the basis of a customer / supplyer relationship. « Customer is the king » as they say. Once you’ve agreed in a deal, then your customer will give you « orders » ( in compliance with your contract, of course), and make decision to stop the deal if the contract allows him to, and he’s not satisfied.
  - GuB-42 7y ago
    The difference is that in a normal customer/supplier relationship, both parties decide on the price and what will be delivered beforehand. Then the supplier does his job anyway he wants, and in the end, hopefully, the customer will leave with a product matching what they agreed upon, and the supplier with the money. The customer doesn't stick his nose in the supplier's business or decide how the job has to be done. Of course, the line can be blurred a bit. You may expect the supplier to follow a certain process, provision for changes, etc... But if you start messing with your supplier's business a little too much, it becomes what is called in french "délit de marchandage", which means you are treating your supplier like an employee, and it is illegal. In France, contracts are much more constrained than in the US. In some cases, like when you rent a house, the contract you signed means almost nothing: most of what is not already a legal obligation is unenforceable.
coliveira 7y ago
Even in the US, if you work for more than a certain number of hours you have right to health insurance and other benefits defined by each state.
duxut_staglatz 7y ago
They cannot force French drivers to work certain hours (under their current contracts), but this is not relevant to their work status: > The fact that the driver is not obliged to connect to the platform and that this absence of connection, irrespective of its duration, does not expose the driver to any penalty, are not taken into consideration when characterising the relationship of subordination. > The criteria for self-employment include the possibility of building up one's own clientele, the freedom to set one's own rates, and the freedom to set the terms and conditions for providing one's services.
- dahfizz 7y ago
  I think we are talking about different things. Now that subordination has been established, using the criteria you list, what's stopping Uber from forcing the drivers to work regular shifts? The drivers are legally subordinate to Uber now, after all.
  - duxut_staglatz 7y ago
    Indeed, now they can (but do not have to) require regular shifts.

zwieback 7y ago

I don't know if that's true. Our hourlies get benefits like health insurance, vacation, etc. Maybe not as good as salaried but it's not as clear cut as "hourly pay only."

atomoton 7y ago
In Ontario (at least pre-Ford) you can get full-time benefits as an hourly worker, as long as you work 40h a week or more (or maybe 35?). It's been awhile though so I'm not super confident on the details here.
- dahfizz 7y ago
  The same is true (at least in my experience) in America. Over 40 hrs/week means the employer has to pay out extra benefits. This is also why employers do not want you to work over 39 hours if you're not salaried.
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    In the US, over 40 hours simply means 1.5x your regular payrate after the 40th hour, if you're "non exempt", i.e. hourly. Some employers might offer something more. https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/overtime
    - ApolloFortyNine 7y ago
      If the company has more than 50 employees they are required to pay for healthcare if you work more than 30 hours a week [1]. https://www.employmentlawhandbook.com/federal-employment-and-labor-laws/aca/ https://www.employmentlawhandbook.com/federal-employment-and...
- freepor 7y ago
  Which is why so many people are on 29/34/39 hour schedules.
  - CydeWeys 7y ago
    Yeah, this is why, like so many other things involving regulation, there should be a gradual proportional phase-out, not a hard line in the sand. So rather than paying two people to do 20 hours each and pay for no benefits, if you did that, you'd be paying for half benefits for each, at which point you may as well just have one person doing 40 hours a week who's fully employed and getting full benefits like you should've been doing all along.
dahfizz 7y ago
What does paid time off even look like if you don't have a set schedule, though? Will Uber drivers just get n hours of wage added to their paycheck every month?
- chrisseaton 7y ago
  I work for an organisation on a contract of as many hours as I want, and I just get paid pro-rata for days off. It’s effectively just extra pay.
- tyfon 7y ago
  Where I live the company has to set aside 12.5% of the salary paid for next years "vacation money". You can chose yourself when to withdraw this money in the following year. For a full time job you are required to take 25 days (or 5 weeks) off work outside of public holidays which is about 10% of the total working time so you usually have a bit more to spend in this period even if the vacation itself is unpaid :)
  - fastball 7y ago
    Why not just pay them more? Seems like a convoluted way to structure a pay increase.
    - tyfon 7y ago
      Because then you would have a bunch of people without money in the vacation month ;) I'd be able to manage it personally but you will find that a lot of people wouldn't..
      - fastball 7y ago
        I find the idea of legislating how businesses operate based on the idea that people aren't expected to have personal responsibility highly distasteful.
        7y ago
munk-a 7y ago
In America very few of those (except health insurance) are actually mandated by the government. Sadly in the US most employment benefits are only exchanged at the grace of the employer.

MaupitiBlue 7y ago

You’re almost completely wrong. Legally, wether you’re an employee or independent contractor matters for everything from the Americans With Disabilities Act through Workers Compensation, not to mention, taxes. Wether the company offers benefits to hourly employees is largely an internal decision.

tasogare 7y ago

If you’re an employee you benefit healthcare, retirement etc. As I understand it, the basic week of work is 35h. You do do less if part-time. Employers also use "cadre" (white collar) contract for more qualified workers they want to milk more than the legal 35h.

Frenziefrenz 7y ago

Such an all or nothing approach sounds slightly peculiar, to put it in the nicest terms possible.

codegeek 7y ago

Hourly in US can also get benefits depending on company's discretion and some mandatory laws. For example, state of NJ has a sick day law that was passed in late 2018 where it made mandatory for employers to provide accrued sick leave to any employee (salaried or hourly) as long as they are on W-2.

smcphile 7y ago

In France, by law hourly employees get medical insurance, a certain amount of paid sick leave, unemployment insurance and also contribute to a pension plan. These benefits are partially paid for by the worker and partially paid for by the employer. Hourly workers must also be paid at least a minimum net wage (after deductions for benefits), currently 7.82 euros per hour. Contract workers pay for their benefits themselves. They’re legally required to pay into the national health insurance plan and to make payments into a pension plan, but the rest is optional. There is no required minimum wage. Whether it’s better to work as an hourly worker or as a contract worker essentially depends on how much you’re making in each case.

GuB-42 7y ago

In France, there are 3 conditions that make you an employee: - pay - work - subordination The first two are relatively straightforward: you get paid to do work. They are important in order to distinguish between volunteers and employees. Obviously, Uber drivers are working for money, it matches. The last part is the most important. It means that the employer has power over the employee, as in: give orders, and punishment if the orders are not followed. If the employer can make decisions unilaterally and at any time, there is subordination, even if there are no fixed work hours and no constant supervision. It is a very commonly broken law in France, at least in spirit.

blaser-waffle 7y ago
It's a commonly broken law in a lot of places. Source: lived and worked in Australia, Canada, and the US.
bsaul 7y ago
Subordination is extremely weird, because one could argue this is also the basis of a customer / supplyer relationship. « Customer is the king » as they say. Once you’ve agreed in a deal, then your customer will give you « orders » ( in compliance with your contract, of course), and make decision to stop the deal if the contract allows him to, and he’s not satisfied.
- GuB-42 7y ago
  The difference is that in a normal customer/supplier relationship, both parties decide on the price and what will be delivered beforehand. Then the supplier does his job anyway he wants, and in the end, hopefully, the customer will leave with a product matching what they agreed upon, and the supplier with the money. The customer doesn't stick his nose in the supplier's business or decide how the job has to be done. Of course, the line can be blurred a bit. You may expect the supplier to follow a certain process, provision for changes, etc... But if you start messing with your supplier's business a little too much, it becomes what is called in french "délit de marchandage", which means you are treating your supplier like an employee, and it is illegal. In France, contracts are much more constrained than in the US. In some cases, like when you rent a house, the contract you signed means almost nothing: most of what is not already a legal obligation is unenforceable.

coliveira 7y ago

Even in the US, if you work for more than a certain number of hours you have right to health insurance and other benefits defined by each state.

duxut_staglatz 7y ago

They cannot force French drivers to work certain hours (under their current contracts), but this is not relevant to their work status: > The fact that the driver is not obliged to connect to the platform and that this absence of connection, irrespective of its duration, does not expose the driver to any penalty, are not taken into consideration when characterising the relationship of subordination. > The criteria for self-employment include the possibility of building up one's own clientele, the freedom to set one's own rates, and the freedom to set the terms and conditions for providing one's services.

dahfizz 7y ago
I think we are talking about different things. Now that subordination has been established, using the criteria you list, what's stopping Uber from forcing the drivers to work regular shifts? The drivers are legally subordinate to Uber now, after all.
- duxut_staglatz 7y ago
  Indeed, now they can (but do not have to) require regular shifts.