Isn't Uber concept similar to AirBnB ? DOes this mean AirBnB users are also at risk of being classified as employees of Airbnb ? Uber, you drive your own car. Airbnb, you rent your own apartment.
4) Uber alone sets prices, and tipping is discouraged, so there is no mechanism for driver (as "contractor") to set prices.
5) Plaintiff driver only provided her time and car. "Plaintiff's work did not entail any 'managerial' skills that could affect profit or loss."
6) Drivers cannot subcontract (presumably negating Uber's position as a "lead generation" tool for contractors).
AirBnB is facing an entirely different challenge - residential vs commercial zoning, hotel taxes, impact on the normal rent market, etc. I'm seeing laws coming up either seeking to regulate & tax them as hotels, or outright ban them as in santa monica: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/05/13/406587575/... Clearly a residential rental market isn't sustainable when you can easily earn at least double with short term rentals.
I wouldn't think so. In AirBnb, the hosts retain control over availability, pricing and make decisions. In addition, while you use AirBnb to book, you book from a person (moral or physical) directly.
In essence, AirBnb is just a broker.
With Uber, you don't rent Wissam's driving services for 20 minutes or hire Samantha to pick you up at SFO. You hire Uber and they dispatch a faceless anonymous cog.
I think no on the basis that Airbnb hosts set their own price.
That said I'd be interested to know the break down between host involvement/room etc and "entire place" because Airbnb seem to have sold a lot on the host element and there's arguably a major commitment to the guest by a live in host. Also things like superhosts [0] which clearly aren't employees but come a bit closer to blurring the lines.
I think the ebay seller analogy mentioned might be best though - Airbnb hosts set the price freely, approve/reject at will, can make individualised offers, earn trust and Airbnb - like ebay - call out without employing (and supposedly without endorsing) highly trusted hosts.
No. AirBnB, from my understanding, doesn't require AirBnB users to provide X features. If AirBnB required users to offer high-speed internet, a personal TV, and a separate way in and out, then you start going down the path Uber went, which is part of what caught Uber up here.
For Uber to fall into AirBnB status, you'd be able to rate drivers, and drivers could request to pick you up, and you'd choose a driver amongst those available. That's not what happens. Uber would have less control.
There is much more involved here, but the decision is fairly easy reading.
I'd say no. If AirBnB hosts provided housekeeping during the stay it'd probably be comparable. AirBnB's business model is closer to a rental car than a driver service.
Uber customers are paying the driver for a service, AirBnB customers are renting an asset - they break down differently from my understanding of the law but IANAL
There is a fair amount of case law in regards for drivers as opposed to other professions. Taxi's, pizza delivery, trucking etc. I'm not sure how or if this flattens out to other sharing economy type businesses.
well it depends, some taxis in California are union, TPAC pretty much hates Uber, so what better way to kill the competition. So do hotel staff unions feel threatened by AirBnB? doubtful, the numbers are just to small. The threat to AirBnB is politicians who want tax money
