3 ms·

While I sympathize with the drivers' right to protest for better treatment, I wouldn't characterize these drivers as employees. It sounds like they should be pr

by 18pfsmt 14y ago

While I sympathize with the drivers' right to protest for better treatment, I wouldn't characterize these drivers as employees. It sounds like they should be protesting the lack of granularity/ accuracy of the Uber rating system. Just so you know where I am coming from: I work in a very similar industry (freight transport), and this model is very common with truck carriers, brokers, independent owner-operators, etc. I've worked as a contractor at two previous tech companies where I was once an employee, and one of them eventually ended up offering half my rate because I did such a poor job on a particular project (I had lots of personal issues to contend with and was trying to start a business). If I had thought it was unfair, and a systematic way to lower costs, I might have made a stink with other contractors, but I knew it was my own, so I just quit dealing with them. Just to reiterate my main point: Contractors are not employees, and the relationship is well defined, and not just to skirt some obligation. It is usually done to align priorities, and assure responsibility and maximum pay for the contractor.

pron 14y ago
> Contractors are not employees, and the relationship is well defined, and not just to skirt some obligation. Contracting is a useful economic and social agreement intended to define a more limited mutual responsibility than full employment, just as dating is not the same as marriage. No one would date if it were expected of them to treat their newly acquainted dates with the same responsibilities spouses are supposed to treat each other. On the other hand, what matters (socially and ethically, if not legally) isn't what the relationship or contract is called, but how it's expressed de facto. For example, I'm not too familiar with US laws, but in my country (Israel), courts grant domestic partners the same rights as married couples (when it comes to splitting property, or even when it comes to spouse health insurance), and contractors (or freelancers) are granted the same rights as employees (e.g. severance pay, insurance) if it is shown that they were contractors in name only (for example, if the contractors worked solely or mostly for one employer, or if they were not at liberty to turn down work without expecting immediate termination). Since Uber's drivers are the very core of its business -- in fact, they are the most crucial "department" in the company -- it seems to me they are actually full employees, and must be treated as such. This is especially true if the drivers work in regular shifts, and are obligated to actually show up to work (I don't know if this is in fact the case; if not, Uber would naturally be less responsible for them).
- 18pfsmt 14y ago
  There are no regular work hours, and nobody is obligated to show up. I know of a publicly traded company that has an almost identical model, but for freight. If you are interested, at a recent transportation conference, the CEO walked the audience through how it works. If you are interested, here's the transcript: http://seekingalpha.com/article/1252781-landstar-system-s-ceo-presents-at-jpmorgan-aviation-transportation-and-defense-conference-transcript http://seekingalpha.com/article/1252781-landstar-system-s-ce... N.B. You will have to hand edit HTML in order to avoid having to login.
  - pron 14y ago
    It may very well be that in this case Uber is right. I just don't like the sentiment, expressed in several comments, that the workers may do as they please -- leave or stay and shut up -- as long as they don't unionize. Just as the company has the power to control wages in order to maximize profit, so too the employees are well within their right to organize and try to use whatever power they have. This does not automatically make them crybabies.

by 18pfsmt 14y ago

pron 14y ago

> Contractors are not employees, and the relationship is well defined, and not just to skirt some obligation. Contracting is a useful economic and social agreement intended to define a more limited mutual responsibility than full employment, just as dating is not the same as marriage. No one would date if it were expected of them to treat their newly acquainted dates with the same responsibilities spouses are supposed to treat each other. On the other hand, what matters (socially and ethically, if not legally) isn't what the relationship or contract is called, but how it's expressed de facto. For example, I'm not too familiar with US laws, but in my country (Israel), courts grant domestic partners the same rights as married couples (when it comes to splitting property, or even when it comes to spouse health insurance), and contractors (or freelancers) are granted the same rights as employees (e.g. severance pay, insurance) if it is shown that they were contractors in name only (for example, if the contractors worked solely or mostly for one employer, or if they were not at liberty to turn down work without expecting immediate termination). Since Uber's drivers are the very core of its business -- in fact, they are the most crucial "department" in the company -- it seems to me they are actually full employees, and must be treated as such. This is especially true if the drivers work in regular shifts, and are obligated to actually show up to work (I don't know if this is in fact the case; if not, Uber would naturally be less responsible for them).

18pfsmt 14y ago
There are no regular work hours, and nobody is obligated to show up. I know of a publicly traded company that has an almost identical model, but for freight. If you are interested, at a recent transportation conference, the CEO walked the audience through how it works. If you are interested, here's the transcript: http://seekingalpha.com/article/1252781-landstar-system-s-ceo-presents-at-jpmorgan-aviation-transportation-and-defense-conference-transcript http://seekingalpha.com/article/1252781-landstar-system-s-ce... N.B. You will have to hand edit HTML in order to avoid having to login.
- pron 14y ago
  It may very well be that in this case Uber is right. I just don't like the sentiment, expressed in several comments, that the workers may do as they please -- leave or stay and shut up -- as long as they don't unionize. Just as the company has the power to control wages in order to maximize profit, so too the employees are well within their right to organize and try to use whatever power they have. This does not automatically make them crybabies.