4 ms·

And on the other hand, plenty of stories of the opposite happening. I'm not sure how much anecdotes add to a story like this. Especially when the story here is

And on the other hand, plenty of stories of the opposite happening. I'm not sure how much anecdotes add to a story like this. Especially when the story here is not about if Uber is offering a better service to customers than "normal" taxis, but when the story is about that Uber is exploiting their employees (which they refuse to even call "employees"). If one business offers better service than another, but, the first business exploits their employees, which service should be investigated? I'd agree the second business should be aiming at improving their service, of course, but we also need to clamp down on businesses who are exploiting people.

V-2 4y ago
> which they refuse to even call "employees" They aren't quite "employees" given that they can reject my trip request without needing to provide any excuse, which by the way happens frustratingly often esp. during rush hours. I'd like to see an actual employee do that - like a waiter in a restaurant ("nah, I won't serve you, I'm busy and don't feel like it"); you'd have a word with their boss. And when things don't work that way, we're probably talking about some form of freelancing. Like a barber renting a chair at a barbershop. He (or she) is not an employee of the barbershop owner, as implied by the fact you can't really complain to the owner if they refuse to serve you.
- soco 4y ago
  So you have never been refused the ride by a taxi driver? Or being left waiting by a waiter?
- capableweb 4y ago
  > They aren't quite "employees" given that they can reject my trip request without needing to provide any excuse, which by the way happens frustratingly often esp. during rush hours. Doing so enough times will lead to Uber penalizing the driver. Does that sound like a freelancer to you? Obviously, the definition will change depending on the country. Referring to a previous court case UK (Employment Tribunal: Uber BV v. Aslam), this is why they think Uber drivers are employees, not freelancers: > Uber set the fare which meant that they dictated how much drivers could earn > Uber set the contract terms and drivers had no say in them > Request for rides is constrained by Uber who can penalise drivers if they reject too many rides > Uber monitors a driver's service through the star rating and has the capacity to terminate the relationship if after repeated warnings this does not improve With those things in mind, it's hard to not feel like Uber drivers are in fact employees of Uber, not freelancers that can freely engage in business while only being "supported" by Uber or using Ubers app.
  - Consultant32452 4y ago
    >Doing so enough times will lead to Uber penalizing the driver. Does that sound like a freelancer to you? As a freelancer in IT: yes, 100%. If I keep rebuffing my clients, they eventually stop calling.
    - capableweb 4y ago
      > As a freelancer in IT: yes, 100%. If I keep rebuffing my clients, they eventually stop calling. They might, unless you're the best freelancer in a niche, and they have no other choice. The difference between you in that situation, and a driver "working" for Uber, is that you or your clients decide if you get any work in that situation, while for the Uber driver, Uber decides if you get any work or not.
      - Consultant32452 4y ago
        What percentage of cancelations do you estimate are because the driver has accepted a higher fare from Uber's competition?
        capableweb 4y ago
        Does it matter? Do it enough time as a Uber "freelancer" and Uber won't send you any more "clients".
        Consultant32452 4y ago
        It matters because, just like me, the freelancer will get work from other sources.
        V-2 4y ago
        So how should this relation work in order for you to accept that Uber drivers don't have to be regarded as employees? Should Uber not have the right to stop pairing the driver with Uber's users no matter what the driver does? Honest question.
- jameshart 4y ago
  If they couldn’t reject your trip request, that would make them your employee. Plenty of businesses give their employees discretion on which customers to serve.
soco 4y ago
It's exactly the same discussion about cheap clothing from H&M made with child labor. The counter argument usually is "but children are not forced to work there!" - while basically true, is avoiding the exploitation point.
- remflight 4y ago
  The children ARE forced to work there. They are literally modern day slaves.

V-2 4y ago

> which they refuse to even call "employees" They aren't quite "employees" given that they can reject my trip request without needing to provide any excuse, which by the way happens frustratingly often esp. during rush hours. I'd like to see an actual employee do that - like a waiter in a restaurant ("nah, I won't serve you, I'm busy and don't feel like it"); you'd have a word with their boss. And when things don't work that way, we're probably talking about some form of freelancing. Like a barber renting a chair at a barbershop. He (or she) is not an employee of the barbershop owner, as implied by the fact you can't really complain to the owner if they refuse to serve you.

soco 4y ago
So you have never been refused the ride by a taxi driver? Or being left waiting by a waiter?
capableweb 4y ago
> They aren't quite "employees" given that they can reject my trip request without needing to provide any excuse, which by the way happens frustratingly often esp. during rush hours. Doing so enough times will lead to Uber penalizing the driver. Does that sound like a freelancer to you? Obviously, the definition will change depending on the country. Referring to a previous court case UK (Employment Tribunal: Uber BV v. Aslam), this is why they think Uber drivers are employees, not freelancers: > Uber set the fare which meant that they dictated how much drivers could earn > Uber set the contract terms and drivers had no say in them > Request for rides is constrained by Uber who can penalise drivers if they reject too many rides > Uber monitors a driver's service through the star rating and has the capacity to terminate the relationship if after repeated warnings this does not improve With those things in mind, it's hard to not feel like Uber drivers are in fact employees of Uber, not freelancers that can freely engage in business while only being "supported" by Uber or using Ubers app.
- Consultant32452 4y ago
  >Doing so enough times will lead to Uber penalizing the driver. Does that sound like a freelancer to you? As a freelancer in IT: yes, 100%. If I keep rebuffing my clients, they eventually stop calling.
  - capableweb 4y ago
    > As a freelancer in IT: yes, 100%. If I keep rebuffing my clients, they eventually stop calling. They might, unless you're the best freelancer in a niche, and they have no other choice. The difference between you in that situation, and a driver "working" for Uber, is that you or your clients decide if you get any work in that situation, while for the Uber driver, Uber decides if you get any work or not.
    - Consultant32452 4y ago
      What percentage of cancelations do you estimate are because the driver has accepted a higher fare from Uber's competition?
      - capableweb 4y ago
        Does it matter? Do it enough time as a Uber "freelancer" and Uber won't send you any more "clients".
        Consultant32452 4y ago
        It matters because, just like me, the freelancer will get work from other sources.
        V-2 4y ago
        So how should this relation work in order for you to accept that Uber drivers don't have to be regarded as employees? Should Uber not have the right to stop pairing the driver with Uber's users no matter what the driver does? Honest question.
jameshart 4y ago
If they couldn’t reject your trip request, that would make them your employee. Plenty of businesses give their employees discretion on which customers to serve.

soco 4y ago

It's exactly the same discussion about cheap clothing from H&M made with child labor. The counter argument usually is "but children are not forced to work there!" - while basically true, is avoiding the exploitation point.

remflight 4y ago
The children ARE forced to work there. They are literally modern day slaves.