3 ms·
> The law did not mandate a $15 and hour wage. It set specific per mile cost requirements, which could easily be well over $15 per hour. I'm not 100% certain,
by coldpie 3y ago
> The law did not mandate a $15 and hour wage. It set specific per mile cost requirements, which could easily be well over $15 per hour.
I'm not 100% certain, but I think this is a workaround for Uber/Lyft's workaround that lets them violate employment laws, namely, that they claim their employees are contractors, not employees. Since the contractor agreement specifies payment per mile, that's what the council's ordinance applies to. If Uber/Lyft were honest about their employees being employees, then they would have the minimum wage law applied, like any other business.
- Manuel_D 3y agoIf Uber and Lyft drivers were employees the Uber and Lyft could mandate which times of day drivers need to work, as well as prohibiting them from working for competing ride share companies. Like it or not, Uber and Lyft drivers are indeed contractors. They set their own hours, and are free to work for competing ride share apps. There's nothing dishonest about this, people are just salty that the "Ride share driver are actually employees" meme is not true.
- coldpie 3y agoSure, I'm just explaining why the council chose the per-mile strategy in order to enforce the already-extant minimum wage ordinance.
- Ekaros 3y agoBut on other hand they are not free to set prices. Which to me is what would make Uber and Lyft purely matching service. Allow the drivers to set the prices and rules. Then customers can take or not take them.