5 ms·

What is the point of this comment? You've effectively spend a few paragraphs adding nothing of value to the conversation. You've effectively restated the gran

What is the point of this comment? You've effectively spend a few paragraphs adding nothing of value to the conversation. You've effectively restated the grandparent's points, but tried to do so in an adversarial manner.

hn_throwaway_99 6y ago
> You've effectively spend a few paragraphs adding nothing of value to the conversation. You might want to check what you consider "adversarial" when it comes to a discussion forum. The issue is that the comment I responded to seems to be under the false notion that workers (or employers, for that matter) get to "choose" how they want to be classified, and that's what this debate is about. My point is that, when it comes to employment law, a worker or employer's preference about how they are classified does not factor in at all about how the law classifies the job.
- schemy 6y ago
  Yes and? If I owned slaves and called them unpaid indefinite interns the law would rightly disagree. You can call the relationship whatever you like, but the law is there to keep the playing field level for everyone. That it's taken Uber so long to play by the same rules as everyone else is a travesty and should take a billion dollar law suit or two for damages to sort out.
  - Gunax 6y ago
    Uber is in a legal grey area. They are independent contractors in the sense that they can choose how much and when to work. They are employees in that they cannot negotiate rates. I don't think it's so clear cut.
    - malandrew 6y ago
      Given that rates are determined collectively by deciding whether or not it's worth your time to go online given the current level of surge. If enough drivers decide it's not worth it, the price will change. This is a pretty standard pricing mechanism in any market for an easily fungible good or service (read: commodity).
    - lackbeard 6y ago
      > They are employees in that they cannot negotiate rates. Hmm... How is an Uber driver different from a plumber here? Let's say Google needs some pipes fixed at one of its offices and they tell me how much they'll pay, refusing to budge from that figure. That doesn't make me Google's employee. I can choose to do the work for that price, or I can go fix Apple's pipes instead. What am I missing?
      - shrimpx 6y ago
        You're not missing anything.
      - nl 6y ago
        Because Uber sets the rates the customer pays, and the driver gets what Uber chooses. The driver doesn't have the ability to turn up a dial and say "I'm going to charge more now". (This isn't the only distinction between an employee and contractor though of course)
        anticensor 6y ago
        > The driver doesn't have the ability to turn up a dial and say "I'm going to charge more now". A licenced taxi driver cannot do that, either.
        nl 6y ago
        Yes, and them being reclassified as employees is a possible outcome: https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/California-s-gig-work-law-targets-Uber-and-14565001.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/California-s-gi...
        lackbeard 6y ago
        I don't see how Uber's relationship with the passenger has any bearing on a driver's relationship with Uber. If instead, my analogy were that I was a general contractor who built water slides and a water park put out a bid on construction of a water slide and refused to negotiate, my only option is to take that bid or leave it. Why does it matter what the water park is going to charge the people to ride the slide?
  - eru 6y ago
    > [...] but the law is there to keep the playing field level for everyone. What makes you think so?
- Gibbon1 6y ago
  Quibble, far as I understand the law in California doesn't force you to be a contractor. But it's hard nosed about when someones an employee. If the law allows you to be a contractor you're free to choose whatever. Currently I'm an employee being paid twice a month. I could get overtime if I ever worked that much, which I don't.

hn_throwaway_99 6y ago

> You've effectively spend a few paragraphs adding nothing of value to the conversation. You might want to check what you consider "adversarial" when it comes to a discussion forum. The issue is that the comment I responded to seems to be under the false notion that workers (or employers, for that matter) get to "choose" how they want to be classified, and that's what this debate is about. My point is that, when it comes to employment law, a worker or employer's preference about how they are classified does not factor in at all about how the law classifies the job.

schemy 6y ago
Yes and? If I owned slaves and called them unpaid indefinite interns the law would rightly disagree. You can call the relationship whatever you like, but the law is there to keep the playing field level for everyone. That it's taken Uber so long to play by the same rules as everyone else is a travesty and should take a billion dollar law suit or two for damages to sort out.
- Gunax 6y ago
  Uber is in a legal grey area. They are independent contractors in the sense that they can choose how much and when to work. They are employees in that they cannot negotiate rates. I don't think it's so clear cut.
  - malandrew 6y ago
    Given that rates are determined collectively by deciding whether or not it's worth your time to go online given the current level of surge. If enough drivers decide it's not worth it, the price will change. This is a pretty standard pricing mechanism in any market for an easily fungible good or service (read: commodity).
  - lackbeard 6y ago
    > They are employees in that they cannot negotiate rates. Hmm... How is an Uber driver different from a plumber here? Let's say Google needs some pipes fixed at one of its offices and they tell me how much they'll pay, refusing to budge from that figure. That doesn't make me Google's employee. I can choose to do the work for that price, or I can go fix Apple's pipes instead. What am I missing?
    - shrimpx 6y ago
      You're not missing anything.
    - nl 6y ago
      Because Uber sets the rates the customer pays, and the driver gets what Uber chooses. The driver doesn't have the ability to turn up a dial and say "I'm going to charge more now". (This isn't the only distinction between an employee and contractor though of course)
      - anticensor 6y ago
        > The driver doesn't have the ability to turn up a dial and say "I'm going to charge more now". A licenced taxi driver cannot do that, either.
        nl 6y ago
        Yes, and them being reclassified as employees is a possible outcome: https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/California-s-gig-work-law-targets-Uber-and-14565001.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/California-s-gi...
      - lackbeard 6y ago
        I don't see how Uber's relationship with the passenger has any bearing on a driver's relationship with Uber. If instead, my analogy were that I was a general contractor who built water slides and a water park put out a bid on construction of a water slide and refused to negotiate, my only option is to take that bid or leave it. Why does it matter what the water park is going to charge the people to ride the slide?
- eru 6y ago
  > [...] but the law is there to keep the playing field level for everyone. What makes you think so?
Gibbon1 6y ago
Quibble, far as I understand the law in California doesn't force you to be a contractor. But it's hard nosed about when someones an employee. If the law allows you to be a contractor you're free to choose whatever. Currently I'm an employee being paid twice a month. I could get overtime if I ever worked that much, which I don't.