from Hacker News

Uber drivers, if employees, owed $730M more: U.S. court papers

by wrongc0ntinent on 5/10/16, 9:07 AM with 91 comments

  • by cylinder on 5/10/16, 2:57 PM

    I really don't want to defend Uber, but how are Uber drivers employees, yet taxi drivers and livery drivers have always been independent contractors tied to a base or dispatchers for decades?

    There are a lot of labor abuses out there in America that I wish would get attention, including contractor classification, but I'm not sure this is one of them.

  • by xatan_dank on 5/10/16, 8:06 PM

    This has probably occurred to everyone already, but I think Uber and Lyft are playing the long game. They're creating a firmly established business model initially nested in legal grey area and barging forward regardless of the speeding tickets they may have to pay. Human driver labor will eventually be replaced by far cheaper machine labor and the challenge of minimizing contractor/employee expenses will no longer be an issue. They're just racing to pack the first punch in what will be a gargantuan industry- the final outcome of the drivers' situation now seems like it will have little effect on the industry's long-term model.
  • by skylan_q on 5/10/16, 9:01 PM

    "Riders have saved $730 million by using Uber"
  • by Buge on 5/11/16, 12:12 AM

    This whole $730M amount seems very strange to me.

    Surely if they were classified as employees instead of as contractors it would come with an accompanying pay decrease. If they decided to drive for Uber at the previously agreed rate as a contractor, wouldn't they also have accepted the job with a $730M pay cut if it came with a $730M reimbursement of their expenses?

    It sounds like they want to get paid for certain things twice.

  • by jobu on 5/10/16, 8:46 PM

    "... drivers who contend they should be classified as employees and therefore entitled to reimbursement for expenses, including gasoline and vehicle maintenance."

    Isn't all that tax deductible? Uber pays the drivers, and then the drivers will have to pay back the government since they can't claim it as a tax deduction anymore. Meanwhile, Uber gets the deduction and gets a tax refund.

    There has to be more to this than just mileage expenses, right? Otherwise it's a huge legal bill for a simple accounting shift.

    EDIT: Nevermind - I was confusing tax deduction with tax credit.

  • by cuchoi on 5/11/16, 1:17 AM

    What is the definition of an employee?

    They are employees because:

    - Uber drivers can be fired.

    - They can't set up their own rates.

    - Have to follow several conditions.

    They are not employees:

    - Because they define their own working hours

    - They have no boss (though they can be 'fired' by the company)

  • by jokoon on 5/10/16, 9:24 PM

    Isn't Uber a good example of libertarian ideology?

    By the way, can drivers choose their rate?

  • by justncase80 on 5/10/16, 7:06 PM

    This title hurts my brain. I don't even know what it's trying to say.
  • by exclusiv on 5/10/16, 10:45 PM

    I think compelling someone to be an employee of a company is stupid and governments are basically doing this. Not everyone wants to be an employee which forces you to be managed by the company and have less flexibility with your lifestyle.

    But I suppose those drivers that want to remain independent contractors could just register an LLC and then contract with Uber. Probably the most sensible so they could use multiple platforms too.

    Then California gets $800 per year per driver for the privilege of running an LLC. Not a bad strategy for the state. Squeeze the company, the employees and the contractors all at the same time.