3 ms·
French 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
by corentin88 7y ago
French 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.