3 ms·
My guess is that the full story is this: Most Uber/Lyft drivers say they don't want to be considered employees because, for most of them, this isn't actually t
by mumblemumble 6y ago
My guess is that the full story is this:
Most Uber/Lyft drivers say they don't want to be considered employees because, for most of them, this isn't actually their job. It's just a side gig. I can't really speak to larger urban areas because I tend to prefer public transit when it's a viable option, but, in the smaller cities where I take most my rideshare rides, a pretty large percentage of the drivers I chat with end up mentioning their day job somewhere in the course of the conversation. I agree that these folks, by virtue of lacking any viable way to independently contract work, cannot reasonably be described as independent contractors. But they don't quite fit the mold of "employee", either.
Then there is another portion of drivers who really are doing this full time. I am guessing that they are a small minority of individual drivers, but that, in larger cities, they may account for a majority of rideshare capacity.
Anyway, if this is how it shakes out, then, regardless of the ratios, it doesn't really make sense to speak about "ridehsare drivers" as if they're a homogeneous unit whose needs can reasonably be met with a one-size-fits-all classification. Perhaps there needs to be a tiered designation, comparable to the various employee sub-designations such as "full time", "part time", "exempt", "non-exempt", etc., that states codify.
- blaser-waffle 6y ago> Most Uber/Lyft drivers say they don't want to be considered employees because, for most of them, this isn't actually their job. It's just a side gig For some, sure. Most of my rides have been with Indian/African/East European drivers who do it basically full time. Easily 90% or more. A small number have been part-timers, mostly stay-at-home moms and retired people. One was a retired bartender and he did Uber mostly because his joints gave out which made standing hard, and Uber allowed him to make some petty cash while talking to people. But hands-down, these were the exceptions, not the rule.
- banannaise 6y agoThis also heavily implies that online discourse skews away from the full-timers, because: 1. They tend to be from less-online demographics 2. If 90% of rides come from drivers working 50 hours a week, and 10% come from drivers working 5 hours a week, then more than half of the drivers work 5 hours a week. Those 5-hour drivers also probably have a lot more time and energy to discuss things on the internet.
- mumblemumble 6y agoThis might also explain the disconnect between "what the survey says," "what my friend says" and "what I say," and what the driver associations are saying. It's conceivable that people who are doing this full time are more likely to let an interest group do the talking for them. Long story short, I'm inclined to say that any source of opinion that isn't breaking drivers' views down by quartiles, is a highly selective version of the story.
- tikiman163 6y agoNon-full time employees often do not receive significant benefits. However, being classified as a contractor means paying the employer side of income taxes (yes, "self-employed" contractors essentially pay double the tax rate of employees). On your taxes your gross income compared to take home after taxes is a much larger margin for contractors as a result, disqualifying people for assistance programs and health insurance subsidies at a much lower take home pay than traditional employees. What Uber and Lyft have essentially done here is to make their employees pay a substantial portion of what would otherwise be corporate taxes, and pocket that difference as profits while their drivers actually meet the legal criteria to require classification as employees. They shouldn't just be getting ordered to begin complying with the law, this should have resulted in a class action law suite for damages and a felony tax evasion case brought against them.