3 ms·
Wow.. I was curious if the pending employment law debates and changes were going to impact their valuation, it appears not.
by mikeyouse 11y ago
Wow.. I was curious if the pending employment law debates and changes were going to impact their valuation, it appears not.
- paulpauper 11y agoit was way overblown, the details ignored in the anti-Uber cacophony. This ruling only effects California and a single driver, as explained by an article in Forbes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2015/06/30/the-california-ruling-on-uber-drivers-would-be-disastrous-but-its-probably-an-aberration/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2015/06/30/the-california-... California did not rule that Uber drivers are employees. Rather, a single labor commissioner made that finding (not a ruling) in an informal, non-binding hearing that is based on the facts of the specific driver’s circumstances, applies only to that driver, is likely to be appealed, and is of no precedential effect. Other commissioners in other circumstances have found the opposite
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- mikeyouse 11y agoIt's clear that there are coming changes to the contractor / on-demand economy and how labor is treated, the value of Uber is likely a proxy for the depth of the changes that are expected.
- andy_ppp 11y agoI get the feeling the law will be changed on this. There is far too much money involved to not have workers rights further eroded by Internet billionaires.
- prostoalex 11y agoBeauty of the private markets. Even if someone wanted to trade on bad news, they can't.
- toomuchtodo 11y agoOther side of the coin is it lets people be stupid far longer than they normally would be. Its private, accredited investors though so no big loss.