8 ms·

We’re legally unequipped to deal well with gig workers. They’re arguably neither contractors nor employees, and shoe horning them into either category will ine

• throw_m239339 6y ago
  > We’re legally unequipped to deal well with gig workers. Yes we are equipped to deal well with gig workers, it's just that Uber doesn't want to play by the rules and want to have it both ways. Let drivers set their own fare, for starter. "Gig workers" aren't a new category of workers just because you use some corporate newspeak to describe these workers.
  • JumpCrisscross 6y ago
    > Let drivers set their own fare, for starter Uber has allowed this since June [1]. [1] https://www.uber.com/blog/california/set-your-fares/ https://www.uber.com/blog/california/set-your-fares/
    • frenchman99 6y ago
      Looking at this page, it seems like they can't set their fares, but only a "fare multiplier", so effectively, Uber still decides.
      • thinkharderdev 6y ago
        Are there any restrictions on what the multiplier can be? If not then they can effectively set the fare. The "standard" fare is $X per mile and I want $Y per mile. I just set the multiplier to Y/X
        • icebraining 6y ago
          They say the "fare multiplier can range from 0.5x to 5.0x in increments of 0.1". Not fully free, but being able to set over 5x the regular price seems mostly academic.
          • Pfhreak 6y ago
            That's interesting, because there's much, much more granularity above 1.0 than below it if you enforce increments of 0.1.
• bpfrh 6y ago
  In austria we have something in between called "Neue selbständige". They are basically a contractor but are not required to register as a company. They are still forced to have a accident, health and pension insurance but not a unemplyoment insurance(like employees have). Doesn't apply to uber though afaik.
• ghaff 6y ago
  Any classification of people accepting money for work is pretty much a creature of tax and employment law and big buckets don't really handle cases at the edges very well. For example, freelance writers can write for whoever they want but they also tend to have clients who they do work for regularly--which has caused some to run afoul of the recent California rules. But that looks a lot different from a full-time Uber driver which, in turn, looks a lot different from someone who drives for Uber now and then to puick up some beer money.
• manfredo 6y ago
  Why wouldn't they fit squarely into the category of contractors? They set their own hours and use their own equipment. The fact that the platform sets dynamic prices doesn't change this. Contracts to do work in times with more demand command higher prices in plenty of other industries. Caterers probable charge more during the holidays, right?
  • jonahhorowitz 6y ago
    The requirements for contractors are (known as the ABC test)[0][1]: 1) Part A of the test requires that the worker is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of the work and in fact; and 2) Part B of the test requires that the worker performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business; and 3) Part C of the test requires that the worker is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed. 4) The contractor must actually be in business for themselves. [0] - https://www.californiaemploymentlawreport.com/2019/03/understanding-the-abc-test-for-independent-contractors-in-california/ https://www.californiaemploymentlawreport.com/2019/03/unders... [1] - https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/faq_independentcontractor.htm https://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/faq_independentcontractor.htm
    • manfredo 6y ago
      1) Uber drivers are totally at liberty to set their own hours, and drive in location of their choice ( destination are chosen by Uber, but a worker is at liberty to drive in San Jose one day and San Francisco the next). 2) The drivers are outside of Uber's business. Uber is a software and technology company, not a taxi service. 3) Drivers are independent workers, in business for themselves. 4) Same as above. With these criteria it unambiguously seems to be the case that ride share drivers are independent contractors. I struggle to see how one could make the case that they are employees.
      • nostoc 6y ago
        > The drivers are outside of Uber's business. Uber is a software and technology company, not a taxi service. That is some serious mental gymnastic.
• victoro 6y ago
  I'm wildly out of my depth, but why couldn't Uber drivers be regulated effectively as micro-franchises? The dynamics seem pretty similar -- drivers benefit from the Uber marketing, brand (which brings trust which is necessary in a business as personal as getting into a stranger's car) and "secret sauce" (the dispatch network and app experience). Uber wants to control some aspects of each "franchise" like the cleanliness of vehicles, making sure that they don't discriminate against customers in unappealing areas, and, to some extent pricing. This is necessary to maintain the Brand and keep customers coming back. Uber doesn't want to get into all aspects of running the franchise (setting hours, making sure drivers are only driving for them etc), because it would un-profitable to do at such scale -- just like McDonalds doesn't want to get deal with the management of individual restaurants.
  • SamReidHughes 6y ago
    AB5 is hitting such franchises pretty hard too.
• yaur 6y ago
  I think it's more like "gig workers" were created to try to do an end run around hard won protection for workers. The idea that someone driving (or waiting for pickups) 40+ hours a week is somehow different is different than somehow different than someone (e.g.) doing tech support for 40+ hours a week is absurd.
  • maerF0x0 6y ago
    The number 40 (sometimes 30) has become this arbitrary standard with large binary differences on each side of the fence. This makes it very difficult for people to negotiate time off, less than full time schedules, partial retirement etc. Laws written in the past often are deeply tied to the assumption of one american lifestyle and dream, which is no longer the reality, and thus is very inefficient for many many people. Laws written to instead capture the concepts and algorithmically scale them would be much more effective. Something like $EMPLOYER must pay N/40ths of the healthcare cost where N is the number of hours worked. People with 2 jobs could get full healthcare premiums covered. People who want to scale back to 1/2 time would know what to expect and it wouldnt be a binary decision factor.
  • emiliobumachar 6y ago
    Consider someone doing tech support for zero to 60 hours per week, at their own discretion, and getting paid for ticked solved.
  • GhostVII 6y ago
    It is entirely different, since you can start or stop your work at any time, can choose to only work when the pay is good enough, and are not committed to a single company. I don't think a job where you can start working by just installing and app, and get paid by the job, should be treated as the same as one where you are required to work some amount each week and get paid the same every week.
  • julienb_sea 6y ago
    That is objectively not true. Most of the "gig economies" were previously done by employees who did not have the kind of benefits you are implying. Taxi drivers almost uniformly do not receive any health insurance benefit at all. Gig economy was designed to circumvent overburdening regulation and supply restrictions, making the service cheaper, more available and more effective for users. The benefits of this are very obvious in the case of taxis versus uber.
• rrrrrrrrrrrryan 6y ago
  There obviously needs to be a new class of workers. I've seen the phrase "Dependent Contractor" tossed around here on HN and I think it'd do quite well. If you work for an employer who sets your hours, pay, etc., you'd still be designated as an employee. If you sell your labor to multiple entities, and/or you set your own pay rate, you're an independent contractor. If you do not set your pay rate, you'd be a "dependent contractor", and entitled to at least some basic worker protections, but not necessarily things like mandatory paid 15-minute breaks. Those should continue to be required for employees whose hours are set by the company for them, but it feels silly to regulate a thing like this when an Uber driver is completely free to just turn the app off if they need a break.
  • gamblor956 6y ago
    A "dependent contractor" is literally what an employee is, except that in your scenario it would just be an employee without the decades of hard-fought labor protections like bathroom breaks.
    • GhostVII 6y ago
      No, a "dependent contractor" is completely different from a regular employee. As an employee you are generally required to work certain hours, or at the very least do a certain amount of work in a week, and are paid either hourly or salaried. A dependent contractor, in this example, can set their own hours, start or stop working whenever they want, and gets paid per job rather than per hour or month.
      • gamblor956 6y ago
        Today I learned from the internet that I have been wrong about the advice I have been providing clients for the past decade... /s Employees have contracts, too. Everything you have described as supposed features of dependent contractors are features of independent contractors. Indeed, that last point is one of the biggest historical factors (in the US, and most of Europe) for determining whether a worker is an employee or a contractor. Historically what made a worker an independent contractor instead of an employee was that a worker was economically independent from an employer for their livelihood because they had other clients paying them for the same work. The work independence factors are an outgrowth of that analysis. As to your other points: Many employees can set their own hours. Most white collar employees can (and now do, as a result of COVID). It is hourly workers that can't chose when they work, because they are paid on the basis of time work rather than labor performed. Generally, whether a contractor can set their own hours is determined by the contract. I'm not aware of any contractors that can simply start and stop working during a contracted job without violating their contract, so in that respect your point isn't valid for any worker, employee or otherwise.
• zjaffee 6y ago
  We need to end employer based health insurance, every other major problem is easily solvable within the gig worker framework (you can have people accrue PTO and other standard benefits based on hours worked).
  • cactus2093 6y ago
    Strongly agree. I'll never understand the argument of forcing people to give up the benefits they already have as gig-economy workers and become full-time employees. Despite all the issues with the current situation, there are still a lot of obvious benefits that these workers do get like the ability to set their own hours, not having to work exactly 40 hours every week, and being able to work on multiple platforms. There is a very obvious solution that gives them the best of both worlds, and also helps millions of other unemployed, part-time employed, and entrepreneurial Americans. Let's make it easier for people to get by and meet their basic needs without tying their well being to long-term full-time employment at a large corporation.
    • rileymat2 6y ago
      > Despite all the issues with the current situation, there are still a lot of obvious benefits that these workers do get like the ability to set their own hours, not having to work exactly 40 hours every week, and being able to work on multiple platforms. None of those are linked to being an employee or contractor.
      • ytpete 6y ago
        I think they are in some cases. An employee can forbid you from working for a competitor at the same time, for example. This is usually a good thing - e.g. Apple doesn't want their Siri engineers moonlighting on the Alexa team after hours. I don't think contractors can be subject to the same sweeping restrictions. I believe for employees paid by the hour, the employer can also dictate the number of hours per week and even the specific schedule. Employers have much more control over their employees -- that's at the heart of the contractor-employee distinction.
• jacquesm 6y ago
  We're very well equipped, we just don't use the laws we already have. If we did the gig economy would die overnight. Just class all of them as employees and be done with it. Gig workers existed in the past. Many harbors used them. You got paid for every piece removed or stowed in the hold of a ship. Governments the world over realized this led to all kinds of bad outcomes and outlawed the practice. Containerization did the rest. So we already know this particular demon and the solution was to make it illegal and to make all such people employees.