Uber has standards for their drivers, listed in the linked complaint. Vehicles have to be specific model years, specific models for Uber Black etc., and well maintained. Can't ask for / accept tips.
>Also, and this is important, driving on Uber Black generally requires a local limousine license, commercial insurance, and a pretty nice car (or finding an employer who already has those things).
How many Uber Black drivers are employees of black car cab companies? Does that factor into this? My impression was that this was more about UberX than Uber Black
That doesn't really rise to the level of specifying how a work product must be produced (one of the main differences between employees and contractors), only some prerequisites. (They won't even let you drive if you don't have a >2004 4-door vehicle)
You can probably make an argument that "you have to get good ratings" encompasses all sorts of informal but well-understood job requirements. IIRC, Uber has recommended all sorts of "tips" for getting good ratings - give a bottle of water etc. They also set things like minimum acceptance rates for incoming requests.
"The most useful part of the Uber guide for its drivers will probably be the advice on how to maintain a high score. Here's what Uber recommends:"
Offer passengers bottled water, chewing gum, snacks, mints and phone chargers.
Keep your vehicle clean and well-maintained.
Dress appropriately.
Open the door.
Offer to carry bags.
Take the best route.
Be nice.
Pick up the right rider.
Don't ask for a five-star rating.
"That doesn't really rise to the level of specifying how a work product must be produced (one of the main differences between employees and contractors),"
Can you please cite any case law for this proposition?
PS there is a ton of caselaw on what it means for a taxi driver to be an employee or not, and this isn't in there :)
There are a lot of people who view jobs as things that are given to someone rather than a free agreement between two parties (cue "power imbalance" objections); extending this out is how you end up with nonsense like businesses owe the rest of us because we allow them to produce products or services and turn a profit.
So the Uber hate comes about because the idea is they are cheating. The drivers' POV is not considered; Uber holds Job Giving Magic and they have to be fair with that power. Proving a service that is in demand is not enough- They have to constantly thank us that we permit them to offer us their service. That's the idea.
No. Just no. Those who consider jobs to be things that are given to someone tend to be the types that believe that the company should be able to do whatever they want.
And a free agreement between two parties really cannot be reached with such a power imbalance. How many Uber drivers are able to negotiate on the cut that Uber takes of the fares?
And no, providing a service that is in demand is not enough. Just because their service is in demand is no reason whatsoever to not comply with the law.
Your first paragraph confuses me- Progressives don't tend to see jobs as being a matter of trade, but more like what people with power dole out to people without. They certainly do not view companies as being allowed to do whatever they want.
Uber like any company or individual wants to get maximum value for its spend. Uber is offering $X to drivers. The drivers can opt to take $X, or to not. If enough drivers don't take $X, Uber will increase $X until enough drivers accept the pay. What is wrong with any of this? This is how YOU operate in your daily life.
The law is wrong in many ways. Don't get lost in the fallacy of appeal to authority.
* People sign up with Uber
* They drive literally whenever they want
* Uber has no standards for their drivers other than "get good ratings" and "pass a background check"
..and they're considered employees? WTF?