4 ms·

"Independent contractors are generally treated as workers who serve multiple clients, have a high level of control over their work, and complete specific jobs o

by itsbits 12y ago

"Independent contractors are generally treated as workers who serve multiple clients, have a high level of control over their work, and complete specific jobs over a limited period of time that fall outside the usual scope of their current employer’s business." By the definition looks like Uber and Lyft are in serious danger.

pbreit 12y ago
By that definition is looks like they are in the clear. Many drivers drive for multiple clients. They have a high level of control over their work. Not exactly sure I understand the third part beyond "specific jobs over limited periods of time" which is also the case.
- icebraining 12y ago
  The part implies that you're more likely to be classified as an independent contractor if you're, say, a designer hired by a fishing company than if you're a fisherman hired by the same company.
  - pbreit 12y ago
    OK, I see. So a software company contracting with drivers sounds like your second example. So all three tenets support the contractor relationship. I think common sense is there as well. I've driven for both and didn't feel even slightly like an employee.
    - icebraining 12y ago
      Uber is not really a software company. They don't sell software, nor solutions based on software. They merely produce software to power their actual business, much like any other large company that has an internal development team. A software company version of Uber is more like Mowares: http://mowares.com/ http://mowares.com/
      - dnautics 12y ago
        technically Uber is a software company, and Raisier is the transportation company. It's kind of a shady shell game.
- itsbits 12y ago
  "complete specific jobs over a limited period of time that fall outside the usual scope of their current employer’s business" is more concerning.. Hiring a software Developer as contracter by a taxi company may be undernorms but A Taxi Management Company whose power is from Software hiring Taxi Drivers doesn't look like comes under this definition...
- vertex-four 12y ago
  > They have a high level of control over their work. No, they don't. They are told when to pick up their passengers, and which route to drive, by their employers. They may not deviate from that route, they may not pick up passengers without Uber's say-so. They may not decline passengers without being penalised. While they are signed in to Uber, precisely what control do they have over their work? Additionally, "complete specific jobs over a limited period of time that fall outside the usual scope of their current employer’s business" means that the test falls on the side of being a contractor if you are doing a one-off job that is not usually what the company does, and an employee otherwise. The point is, a contractor is that person you bring in to write code for your SAP system, or fix the IT infrastructure, or build a new building, or program the A/C. Things where you give the contractor a task, and they complete it using their knowledge, where you don't get to define the specifics of how it's done. If you want control over precisely how they do their job, and it's part of what makes the company money on a day-to-day basis (you can argue that Uber are selling their software platform all you want, but the service it actually provides is getting you a taxi, not access to its software), I don't see how they're not employees.
  - Dylan16807 12y ago
    >They are told when to pick up their passengers, and which route to drive, by their employers. They may not deviate from that route, they may not pick up passengers without Uber's say-so. While they are signed in to Uber, precisely what control do they have over their work? Told when to enter in a period they signaled as available, told what areas they are allowed to walk in, no other visitors... All of that could apply equally well to someone contracted to fix the A/C. The drivers choose when and where to work. Most of what they lack control over is in the definition of the job, driving people to destinations. (Are you sure they have to follow a specific route?) The main thing they can't control is which specific person to pick up. That's pretty minor all in all. Your argument about having to "complete specific jobs over a limited period of time that fall outside the usual scope of their current employer’s business" is much stronger, but I don't think level of control over the work is going to get very far.
  - dnautics 12y ago
    > They may not deviate from that route, they may not pick up passengers without Uber's say-so. Come again? > They may not decline passengers without being penalised. The penalty is trivial. Sure, repeated declines are grounds for termination, but you really have to do a lot. When I was dual-driving for lyft and uber, I think I racked nearly 20-30% rejection rates on uber, they didn't even warn me that I was doing poorly and I think I'm still a "highly regarded" driver on their system.
pudo 12y ago
> Uber and Lyft are in serious danger. Worker's rights are being at least minimally protected. FTFY.
- Dylan16807 12y ago
  If they have to be classified as employees to have worker's rights, perhaps the real problem is with the laws governing contractors.

by itsbits 12y ago

pbreit 12y ago

By that definition is looks like they are in the clear. Many drivers drive for multiple clients. They have a high level of control over their work. Not exactly sure I understand the third part beyond "specific jobs over limited periods of time" which is also the case.

icebraining 12y ago
The part implies that you're more likely to be classified as an independent contractor if you're, say, a designer hired by a fishing company than if you're a fisherman hired by the same company.
- pbreit 12y ago
  OK, I see. So a software company contracting with drivers sounds like your second example. So all three tenets support the contractor relationship. I think common sense is there as well. I've driven for both and didn't feel even slightly like an employee.
  - icebraining 12y ago
    Uber is not really a software company. They don't sell software, nor solutions based on software. They merely produce software to power their actual business, much like any other large company that has an internal development team. A software company version of Uber is more like Mowares: http://mowares.com/ http://mowares.com/
    - dnautics 12y ago
      technically Uber is a software company, and Raisier is the transportation company. It's kind of a shady shell game.
itsbits 12y ago
"complete specific jobs over a limited period of time that fall outside the usual scope of their current employer’s business" is more concerning.. Hiring a software Developer as contracter by a taxi company may be undernorms but A Taxi Management Company whose power is from Software hiring Taxi Drivers doesn't look like comes under this definition...
vertex-four 12y ago
> They have a high level of control over their work. No, they don't. They are told when to pick up their passengers, and which route to drive, by their employers. They may not deviate from that route, they may not pick up passengers without Uber's say-so. They may not decline passengers without being penalised. While they are signed in to Uber, precisely what control do they have over their work? Additionally, "complete specific jobs over a limited period of time that fall outside the usual scope of their current employer’s business" means that the test falls on the side of being a contractor if you are doing a one-off job that is not usually what the company does, and an employee otherwise. The point is, a contractor is that person you bring in to write code for your SAP system, or fix the IT infrastructure, or build a new building, or program the A/C. Things where you give the contractor a task, and they complete it using their knowledge, where you don't get to define the specifics of how it's done. If you want control over precisely how they do their job, and it's part of what makes the company money on a day-to-day basis (you can argue that Uber are selling their software platform all you want, but the service it actually provides is getting you a taxi, not access to its software), I don't see how they're not employees.
- Dylan16807 12y ago
  >They are told when to pick up their passengers, and which route to drive, by their employers. They may not deviate from that route, they may not pick up passengers without Uber's say-so. While they are signed in to Uber, precisely what control do they have over their work? Told when to enter in a period they signaled as available, told what areas they are allowed to walk in, no other visitors... All of that could apply equally well to someone contracted to fix the A/C. The drivers choose when and where to work. Most of what they lack control over is in the definition of the job, driving people to destinations. (Are you sure they have to follow a specific route?) The main thing they can't control is which specific person to pick up. That's pretty minor all in all. Your argument about having to "complete specific jobs over a limited period of time that fall outside the usual scope of their current employer’s business" is much stronger, but I don't think level of control over the work is going to get very far.
- dnautics 12y ago
  > They may not deviate from that route, they may not pick up passengers without Uber's say-so. Come again? > They may not decline passengers without being penalised. The penalty is trivial. Sure, repeated declines are grounds for termination, but you really have to do a lot. When I was dual-driving for lyft and uber, I think I racked nearly 20-30% rejection rates on uber, they didn't even warn me that I was doing poorly and I think I'm still a "highly regarded" driver on their system.

pudo 12y ago

> Uber and Lyft are in serious danger. Worker's rights are being at least minimally protected. FTFY.

Dylan16807 12y ago
If they have to be classified as employees to have worker's rights, perhaps the real problem is with the laws governing contractors.