4 ms·
I think the real point of challenging Uber is this: they can either set the rates or they can push the cost of materials on to drivers, but they can't do both.
by SomeStupidPoint 12y ago
I think the real point of challenging Uber is this: they can either set the rates or they can push the cost of materials on to drivers, but they can't do both.
That is, they must either embrace the full employee or full contractor package, and not just take the parts they like of each with none of the liabilities.
- greggyb 12y agoDo you think that it is really that binary? I think that this quote from the article is apt: >U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria, who is overseeing the Lyft case, said that existing labor law doesn’t map well with these companies’ business models. Lyft drivers don’t seem exactly like employees or independent contractors, he wrote in his motion. “The jury in this case will be handed a square peg and asked to choose between two round holes,” Just because we have two clearly delineated buckets to drop people into doesn't mean that these accurately describe those individuals.
- SomeStupidPoint 12y agoRunning a business that relies on questionable legal intrepretations doesn't necessarily have to be something we support. That Uber set themselves up in such a way that they can't relate to their workers in a clearly legal way is suspicious -- which is exactly the accusation: they're dodging liabilities they should have by making up their own kind of square peg.