Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday October 24 2020, @01:49AM   Printer-friendly
from the who-remembers-the-passage-of-Section-1706? dept.

California appeals court says Uber, Lyft drivers are employees, not contractors:

A California appeals court on Thursday upheld a state order requiring Uber and Lyft to treat their California drivers as employees instead of independent contractors. The ruling comes less than two weeks before California voters will be asked to exempt the ride-hailing giants from the state's ground-breaking gig economy law.

The decision won't have any immediate impact because it doesn't take effect for at least 30 days, well after the November 3 vote on Proposition 22.

Uber and Lyft had appealed an August preliminary injunction by a San Francisco judge. But the appellate ruling found "no legal error" and allowed it to stand.

"We conclude that the injunction was properly issued in accordance with enduring principles of equity," the 74-page ruling said. "It is broad in scope, no doubt, but so too is the scale of the alleged violations."

Uber and Lyft issued statements noting that the ruling doesn't take immediate affect(sic) and urging voters to approve Prop. 22. Lyft also said it is considering appealing to the California Supreme Court.

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and the city attorneys of Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco had sued Uber under a new California law that says companies can only classify workers as contractors if they perform work "outside the usual course" of their business. Becerra praised the court's decision.


Original Submission

Related Stories

US Court Rules Uber and Lyft Workers are Contractors 7 comments

Californian court has ruled that "gig" economy giants including Uber and Lyft can continue treating their workers as independent contractors:

The California appeals court found that a labour measure, known as Proposition 22, was largely constitutional.

Labour groups and some workers had opposed the measure, saying it robbed them of rights like sick leave.

The firms say the proposition protects other benefits such as flexibility.

The latest ruling overturns a decision made by a lower court in California in 2021, which found that Proposition 22 affected lawmakers' powers to set standards at the workplace.

The state of California and a group representing Uber, Lyft and other firms appealed against the decision.

This discussion has been archived.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.
(1)
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by c0lo on Saturday October 24 2020, @01:53AM (2 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 24 2020, @01:53AM (#1068141) Journal

    Lawyers for Uber and Lyft say drivers are not fundamental to the business, arguing the companies are "multi-sided platforms" whose activities encompass much more than transportation.

    If drivers aren't fundamental to the business, what stop you to drop them entirely and do without them? Like do it now and I might believe you.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 5, Touché) by MostCynical on Saturday October 24 2020, @02:05AM (1 child)

      by MostCynical (2589) on Saturday October 24 2020, @02:05AM (#1068142) Journal

      But their core business is actually based on exploitation and fooling investors. Divers have nothing to do with that!

      --
      "I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 24 2020, @02:11AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 24 2020, @02:11AM (#1068143)

        They ain't got no divers, other than their share price diving.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Saturday October 24 2020, @03:20AM (6 children)

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Saturday October 24 2020, @03:20AM (#1068151)

    I've seen countless Uber/Lyft cars where they had *both* logos on the car, and have used a few too: these drivers are typically working for both companies *at the same time*. Of course, they're not actually transporting riders for both services simultaneously, but they are "on call" with both, so when they're waiting for a hail, they could get one from either service. After that ride is done, they're back to being on-call for both services, so they're busier, since they get paid by the ride, not as a regular employee working 8 hours/day.

    So is this going to change? I don't think regular cab drivers are paid by the hour either, but instead by the ride. Salespeople are similar; they may be "employees", but they're frequently paid on commission.

    This seems a lot like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. The problem, as I see it, is that politicians are trying to force a system of employment that was devised in the industrial age of working in factories in "shifts" onto professions which do not resemble that at all. On top of that, we have this crazy system in America where being a "full time employee" (working 40 hours/week) entitles you to "benefits" (namely employer-subsidized health insurance, which otherwise is unaffordable for many people), whereas "part time employees" (less than 40 hrs/week) aren't entitled to these same benefits. So maybe we should just have a better healthcare system where people don't need to work a "full time" job to have health insurance coverage, and different employment models can be tried out.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 24 2020, @03:46AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 24 2020, @03:46AM (#1068156)

      On top of that, we have this crazy system in America where being a "full time employee" (working 40 hours/week) entitles you to "benefits" (namely employer-subsidized health insurance, which otherwise is unaffordable for many people), whereas "part time employees" (less than 40 hrs/week) aren't entitled to these same benefits. So maybe we should just have a better healthcare system where people don't need to work a "full time" job to have health insurance coverage, and different employment models can be tried out.

      Or maybe we should keep it simple and everyone should be independent contractor to make the system fair for everyone.

    • (Score: 0, Troll) by fakefuck39 on Saturday October 24 2020, @07:46AM (2 children)

      by fakefuck39 (6620) on Saturday October 24 2020, @07:46AM (#1068185)

      yeah, cali is and always has been a bunch of fools. now that their court decided they're employees, their work needs to be changed so it fits the work profile of an employee. strange - I thought they were already employees because of how they work.

      From their current work is: during a time of their choosing they pick up a passenger of their choosing.

      since you went on a random healthcare rant: people are free to work part-time jobs and have healthcare. They need to pay their premiums, which are not cheap. Funny thing though - the salaries in the US are more vs EU as well. By a lot more than the insurance premiums. I've lived in Catalonia and France btw, and visited ~40 other countries.

      If you don't make enough to even pay premiums, guess what - you get it paid for by the government. I made 25k one year after being in a fire and barely working. My premiums were $8/month. And if you make even less, you get free medicaid from the state. The issue is, people expect minimum wage not to be a living wage, but a "living pretty nice in my own apartment going to restaurants wage." It's meant to survive on - hence "minimum." Poor people don't get their own apartment. They get a 1 bedroom, not in the city center, and their roommate sleeps in the living room. They get cheap beef, canned tuna, and lentils with rice. They don't go to the olive garden "so they can eat."

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by Grishnakh on Sunday October 25 2020, @01:43AM (1 child)

        by Grishnakh (2831) on Sunday October 25 2020, @01:43AM (#1068403)

        The issue is, people expect minimum wage not to be a living wage, but a "living pretty nice in my own apartment going to restaurants wage." It's meant to survive on - hence "minimum." Poor people don't get their own apartment. They get a 1 bedroom, not in the city center, and their roommate sleeps in the living room.

        Actuallly, I totally disagree that this should be normal or accepted. Nearly everyone should be able to afford their own place, and if they can't, that's a failure of public policy. Let's look at Japan as an example: in Tokyo, you can buy (buy, not rent) a tiny, tiny little efficiency for around $30k. Of course, it's super-tiny, it has no kitchen (just a hot plate and a small sink), and it's nowhere near the city center so you're looking at an hour train ride to work unless your work happens to be out in that outskirts area. But it's available, and it's cheap, and it's all yours. Cities in other countries (esp. Asia) have options like this for people who don't want roommates and don't have much money. Why doesn't this kind of thing exist here? One big reason is stupid building codes and laws about what constitutes an "inhabitable" dwelling. So, for instance, you can't get a home in America that doesn't have a fully-functional kitchen. Why is this? No one actually *needs* a kitchen. You can buy a hot plate from Walmart for $20, or better yet a microwave for $50. In Japan, convenience stores are everywhere, open 24 hours, and actually pretty cheap, and carry all kinds of nutritious food for single people (like small 1-person microwaveable meals). We have other stupid laws too, like requirements about the number of bedrooms, the silly idea that a room doesn't qualify as a "bedroom" unless it has a built-in closet (apparently these idiots never looked at how large houses in the 1800s were built--they didn't have closets back then), etc. On top of that, there just isn't much construction aimed at single people or people without a lot of money, for reasons I'm not sure of. Basically, if you can't afford a McMansion (or don't want one and the associated utility bills, and you want something that's convenient and walkable to lots of restaurants and neighborhood stores), then you're considered poor trash and developers have no interest in catering to people like that.

        • (Score: 2) by fakefuck39 on Sunday October 25 2020, @07:42PM

          by fakefuck39 (6620) on Sunday October 25 2020, @07:42PM (#1068622)

          I literally have lived in Tokyo. for 30k, per year, you can Rent that tiny place. For about 150k you can buy it. BTW, you'll have to pay about 2% of the value of your condo in property/city taxes annually - about $250/month in taxes.

          Guess what sherlock, that same tiny place in tokyo you're saying is an example of doing it the right way? You can rent something that small for like $400/moth, on airbnb - with no kitchen, if you're ok with a 1 hour commute. If you sign a contract for a year directly with the owner, you can get it for $300.

          I've lived in 4 EU countries and Japan. I have traveled to about 40 countries for fun and work. US is cheaper for food and housing that EU. Much cheaper. The people complaining about minimum wage aren't complaining they can't afford a place of their own like the one you described. They're complaining they can't afford to rent a 1 bedroom apartment on their own, in an expensive area of the city. There is an insane number of super cheap locations in the US where you should be living on minimum wage. The entitled assholes don't want to move there. They want unskilled minimum wage labor to give them a nice life - not a minimum life.

          And irrelevant of what you think, minimum does not mean "I can buy a house." It means minimum.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 24 2020, @02:30PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 24 2020, @02:30PM (#1068241)

      onto professions which do not

      Taxi drivers are not professionals. Most Americans have a driver's license, so driving a taxi is unskilled labor.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday October 24 2020, @04:33PM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 24 2020, @04:33PM (#1068263) Journal

        Taxi drivers are not professionals. Most Americans have a driver's license, so driving a taxi is unskilled labor.

        Except, of course, driving is a set of skills as is finding where you're going. Once you ignore the skills, then everything is unskilled labor.

  • (Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 24 2020, @07:44AM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 24 2020, @07:44AM (#1068184)

    Contractors:
    * Choose their own hours, within reason
    * Supply their own equipment
    * Are responsible for their own expenses
    * Are paid per task completed, rather than per unit of time
    * Use their own expertise to accomplish the task
    * Work on an intermittent/as-needed basis rather than a set schedule

    There is no sense in which Uber/Lyft drivers are employees.

    If California really wants to crack down on abuse of contractor classification, they'd have to go after offshore IT staffing... But they certainly wouldn't want to do anything that actually promotes the employment and welfare of Americans.

    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday October 24 2020, @04:39PM

      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday October 24 2020, @04:39PM (#1068266) Journal

      * Work on an intermittent/as-needed basis rather than a set schedule

      On that last point, Uber/Lyft drivers can stop or start working without the obligation of notifying anyone ahead of time. There's no two week notice. Uber/Lyft might not even get a two minute notice.

      This is just a reward to taxi and labor union cartels. Everyone else gets screwed.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 25 2020, @12:09AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 25 2020, @12:09AM (#1068379)

      But they certainly wouldn't want to do anything that actually promotes the employment and welfare of Americans.

      LOL. "Welfare" and "gig economy".

    • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Sunday October 25 2020, @01:47AM

      by Grishnakh (2831) on Sunday October 25 2020, @01:47AM (#1068409)

      Yeah, exactly. There's countless examples of people in jobs being mis-classified as "independent contractors" when in fact they have to show up to work at a particular time and work a set schedule (or be fired), don't provide their own equipment, are paid by the hour, etc., yet the IRS and state bureaus of labor turn a blind eye to this, and have for decades. Uber/Lyft drivers really do fit the "contractor" description to a tee, and are the last companies they should be going after. When are they going to do something about all the little two-bit companies that abuse employees by mis-classifying them? But of course, there's no big headlines in going after some little 20-employee operation, instead of one of the big tech companies that's pissed off the politically-connected taxicab companies.

      Are taxicab drivers classified as regular employees or contractors?

(1)