Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Saturday August 20 2016, @02:53PM   Printer-friendly
from the not-uber-alles dept.

A California judge has rejected the nearly $100m settlement deal between Uber and a group of aggrieved drivers.

Judge Edward Chen said on Thursday [PDF] the dial-a-ride app maker's proposed settlement package "as a whole as currently structured is not fair, adequate, and reasonable." The drivers are suing Uber, accusing the San Francisco biz of breaking labor laws, and Uber is trying to settle the class action out of court.

Chen said that Uber's proposed deal – in which the drivers would have been paid roughly $84m to give up their claims that Uber broke rules on tips and other labor rights – was too much in favor of Uber and did not afford the drivers adequate protections.

Specifically, Chen said, the non-cash portions of the deal would not bring drivers the additional employment protections, higher pay, and arbitration rights they had been seeking when they filed suit.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Gravis on Saturday August 20 2016, @05:27PM

    by Gravis (4596) on Saturday August 20 2016, @05:27PM (#390614)

    Ok, I'm naive, but I still don't get it. No one force these people to drive for Uber; they knew the terms they were signing up for.

    by that logic, there's not need for a minimum wage much less the need to raise it. it's called worker exploitation.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by bradley13 on Saturday August 20 2016, @06:03PM

    by bradley13 (3053) on Saturday August 20 2016, @06:03PM (#390634) Homepage Journal

    Ah, but I'm not so sure about minimum wage either. It's well meant: make sure anyone with a job earns enough to live on. However, it's the "with a job" bit that is the problem. Someone with minimal skills - which includes most young people trying to get a start - and you aren't going to find a job at $12 or $15 an hour. You aren't worth that much, so you never get that first job, and you never gain the skills you need.

    The main argument for minimum wage is to prevent exploitation of people who do, in fact, have valuable skills. Particularly in the current US labor market, with high unemployment, this may be a problem. However, if you look the arguments in favor of a high minimum wage [chron.com] they never address the fact that it - inevitably - reduces the total number of available jobs.

    tl;dr: There is a strong argument that a high minimum wage is counterproductive [manhattan-institute.org].

    --
    Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
    • (Score: 2) by dingus on Saturday August 20 2016, @06:13PM

      by dingus (5224) on Saturday August 20 2016, @06:13PM (#390637)

      >they never address the fact that it - inevitably - reduces the total number of available jobs.

      I believe they've had the minimum wage at $15 in Seattle for several years with no measurable difference.

      Anyway, the reason we have minimum wage laws is to prevent the literal wage slavery that happened in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In factories full of unskilled laborers.