4 ms·
Counterpoint (from the basis of what I know from how the US, not France, classifies independent contractors): 1. Uber drivers also drive for Lyft and other ser
by c3534l 7y ago
Counterpoint (from the basis of what I know from how the US, not France, classifies independent contractors):
1. Uber drivers also drive for Lyft and other services
2. They can reject a passenger when the call comes in
3. They bring their own tools to the job (their car)
4. They provide their own training and technical qualifications (they're responsible for getting a drivers license, license plate, etc.)
5. They set their own hours
6. The choose where they work
7. They're paid by the job and the price is based on the job, not necessarily just hourly wages (like paying for a deck, or a custom paint job)
8. They work with limited supervision
This sounds an awful lot to me like an independent contractor working for a small number of driving services. I do think that the fact that drivers have limited ability in a given app to set their own rates indicates employment, but very rarely does an independent contractor actually meet every single one of the criteria I listed. A house cleaner, for instance, brings their own tools, etc., but they're not paid by the job and they don't work with limited supervision. Meanwhile some construction work might mean that work can only be done during specific hours of the day using specialized equipment provided by the nuclear plant / factory / whatever.
This is as opposed to someone like Microsoft or Intel that hires employees, but gives them a different badge and excludes them from certain meetings and then goes and pretends they're contractors when they're actually just poorly paid interns.
- corentin88 7y agoFrench law only requires a "relationship of subordination" to qualify someone as an employee. The press release is very short and explains why the French court considers that an Uber’s driver is in a relationship of subordinate. > Drivers who use the Uber application do not build up their own clientele, do not freely set their rates, and do not determine the terms and conditions of providing their transportation service. The company imposes the itinerary and the driver’s fare is adjusted if this itinerary is not followed. The destination is unknown to the driver, thereby revealing that the driver cannot freely choose the route that suits him/her.
- c3534l 7y agoSure. I did try to qualify my statement saying I was basing my argument on US law. French law is whatever a French court decides it is. But I do think that riding-app drivers are, as a matter of opinion, much more like hiring someone to paint your house than a regular employee relationship.
- CydeWeys 7y agoYour analogy is off here. The person whose house is being painted is like the passenger in an Uber; this finding does not establish an employee relationship here. Rather, the employee relationship is between that of the painters and the painting company that is paying them out to do numerous painting jobs. That is the closest analog in the Uber situation. And yes, these painters would be classified as employees under French law too, as they should be.
- duxut_staglatz 7y agoDo they work with limited supervision? The company imposes the itinerary and the driver’s fare is adjusted if this itinerary is not followed. The monitoring is automatic instead of having a boss peering over your shoulder.
- darkwizard42 7y agoFares are not adjusted for drivers if they don't take a ride. Rides are provided to the driver because the company believes they are the best driver for the job (closest, maybe they have preferences to go in that direction) source: work for lyft.
- duxut_staglatz 7y agoThis is a different point that the one I made.
- mayneack 7y ago> 2. They can reject a passenger when the call comes in I think they are penalized for doing so. They have to accept a certain percentage.
- awad 7y agoA general contractor can penalize/blacklist sub contractors who don't take their jobs, too. Of course, most of the time, there are reasonable humans on both sides and this can be solved, whereas the gig services operate at a scale where it feels harder to get mutual satisfaction, which might be one of the core issues. I'm honestly not sure where this all ends up. The services certainly _feel_ exploitive when you hear about all the horror stories, but turning everyone into employees may then be fraught with new issues of employer<>employee rights and obligations (for ex defined hours, time off, etc)