You've obviously never owned a franchise business like MacDonald's. You OWN the restaurant but must follow MacDonald's rules. An Uber driver OWNS their business but must follow Uber's guidelines. An employee is NEVER independent, even if they get some benefits. Face it; many people don't want to be "employees". They LIKE the freedom. That should not be taken away from them. You want employees so bad, start a taxi company and hire by the hour with full benefits. No one will stop you. But leave other people alone. Please.
Nope. It's a labor counsel attempt to stifle free enterprise. As I mentioned above the bill was written by the California Labor Counsel and was loudly opposed by many of the exact people it was allegedly designed to "protect".Under the bill, workers will only be considered independent contractors if their employer can prove three things. First, the employer must prove that the worker is not under “the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of the work and in fact.” Second, the employer must also prove that the worker “performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business.” Finally, the employer must prove that “[t]he person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as that involved in the work performed.”
THAT sounds like an independent contractor to me. If you give something a label, make sure it fits the label. Do you think the above is not a fitting description of an independent contractor?
That's bull****, I'm an independent contractor and I love it.
If I were to offer painting services on craigslist, am I then an employee of craigslist? You don't understand the gig economy at all.
Repeating the same crap unsupported crap will not make it real.Fail again. An Uber driver is exactly the definition of an independent contractor. You may not like it, but that's the facts.
4800 a month when 2000 goes to operating costs is not alot and no way is that done on part time hours. That person has to pay for their own benefits, there own SS contributions (are they eligible?) and pay entirely for their own pension/retirement
You are assuming 2000 in operating costs. 2800/mo part time and can work when you want to work is very good. As far as benefits, if they are part time, they have a job where they get benefits already. And, so what if they pay ss benefits. No, they don't have to pay as independent contractors. However, in California, the law now says Uber and Lyft are not independent contractors and are employees. That will most likely end up in a long court battle.
You brought up benefits? No such animal. Say your position by the corporation is deemed to be worth $100,000. But, they want to lure you to their company. So, they pay you $80,000 in salary (formerly you were making $50,000) and then use the $20,000 to purchase your benefits. Something you could have done yourself if they paid you the entire $100,000. Not only that, the corporation gets tax benefits for doing this. Yet, if you would have taken the $20,000 and got your own benefits, you could write it all off. Basic business 101. No such thing as benefits.
Again there is no way they are making $4800 a month working part time hrs at Uber. That would be around $60/hr (20hr/week) or $50 /hr at 24 hr/week. Most studies have put the average wage at Uber at around 11-15 /hr after expenses. Even at full time hrs the person would be making $30/hr. that might be achieved by lucky Uber Black drivers, but the vehicle expense is quite a bit higher I believe in those cases
36.93 hours at $30/hr. I've never taken Uber or Lyft so I don't know the rate. Still a good wage for part-time work. Same could be said with pizza drivers that wear and tear on the car should be calculated. The drivers are using their cars. They are usually paid hourly wages and tips. I think Uber and Lyft have a case in court that the drivers are incurring their own expenses and therefore can be considered independent contractors. What I do know about the California law is it was pushed by unions and the State Tax board. It was about the money unions were losing and the taxes the state claims they were using, which is questionable. There's no indication that independent contractors pay less in taxes than employees even with the write-offs.
Nope. It's a labor counsel attempt to stifle free enterprise. As I mentioned above the bill was written by the California Labor Counsel and was loudly opposed by many of the exact people it was allegedly designed to "protect".
Wouldn't it be funny if companies like Uber or Lyft went out and deleted all the accounts of the California politicians that voted for the bill?
You tell me what is wrong with the following new CA law definition of an independent contractor:
'Under the bill, workers will only be considered independent contractors if their employer can prove three things. First, the employer must prove that the worker is not under “the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of the work and in fact.” Second, the employer must also prove that the worker “performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business.” Finally, the employer must prove that “[t]he person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as that involved in the work performed.” '
Drivers committed to being on-the-job full-time know they're getting screwed. Stop the scam, please.
What? Who TF said anything about "barefoot children" and shoe factories. IN CALIFORNIA? Try to familiarize your self on the topic before spewing senseless verbiage."Free enterprise". Hilarious. Like barefoot children working in shoe factories. Free enterprise. They're independent contractors. They can work in any shoe factory they wish. But don't regulate them. That stifles free enterprise. They can work whenever they want to. As long as the shoe factory will have them. Free enterprise. Get in line. To contract with us, you have to punch-in and punch-out. Free enterprise. What a joke.
Uber and Lyft right now are losing money.
That of course has to change at some point for the companies to remain in operation. That means one of three things in general, raise prices, lower costs (driver payouts) or a combination of. They are not losing a little bit of money, but on order of 30% of revenues. So the payouts the part time drivers are getting will likely become lower in the near future. I also wonder how many of the drivers have accounted for the depreciation of their vehicle and the overall costs of vehicle operation into their compensation
Now for innovation, we all need to recall that Uber is investing in self driving car technology, with the eventual goal of replacing all these independent contractors. Of course by then Uber will have no capital and will franchise out the operation of the vehicles to independent contractors who will buy the vehicle and be responsible for cleaning and maintenance while having the vehicle drive itself for hours on end
What? Who TF said anything about "barefoot children" and shoe factories. IN CALIFORNIA? Try to familiarize your self on the topic before spewing senseless verbiage.
Sounds pretty vague to me. An Uber driver is an independent contractor.
California passes Assembly Bill 5 for gig workers
Its my opinion that with very few exceptions, the people where the rubber hits the road aren’t making any money. Independent contactorship can work in lots of areas, but it takes big sales with low overhead. Uber snd Lyft make the money, the driver/owner gets the squeeze.
Tax collectors don’t like independents because they often end up owing, and cant pay. And regular taxi companies are getting hammered.
So we shall see. Uber and Lyft had better bring out the check books, ‘cause Daddy is hungry.
Sounds pretty vague to me. An Uber driver is an independent contractor.
What? Who TF said anything about "barefoot children" and shoe factories. IN CALIFORNIA? Try to familiarize your self on the topic before spewing senseless verbiage.
Only because Uber called them that in order to bypass a bunch of employment law.
You really have no grasp of how the gig economy works or why it appeals to many people, do you? Or what this issue is really all about.Unregulated free enterprise would have private business dictating the employer-employee relationship. Without regulation that include labor law, workers would have no recourse than to follow dictate. No collective bargaining or right to strike, etc. No govt regulation to do with work safety and health conditions, etc. Remember, we once had slavery and servitude. You know, workers taking jobs away from real Americans by accepting lower pay and conditions that the average citizen would/could not accept.
You earn the total non-relevant post of the day award. We're not talking about slavery or people being forced to work in dangerous and unhealthy workplaces for six days a week. We're talking about people who enjoy the freedom of being able to determine when, where, and for how long they wish to work each day.It's how the world worked before all those job-killing regulations came up.
California passes Assembly Bill 5 for gig workers
Its my opinion that with very few exceptions, the people where the rubber hits the road aren’t making any money. Independent contactorship can work in lots of areas, but it takes big sales with low overhead. Uber snd Lyft make the money, the driver/owner gets the squeeze.
Tax collectors don’t like independents because they often end up owing, and cant pay. And regular taxi companies are getting hammered.
So we shall see. Uber and Lyft had better bring out the check books, ‘cause Daddy is hungry.
California passes Assembly Bill 5 for gig workers
Its my opinion that with very few exceptions, the people where the rubber hits the road aren’t making any money. Independent contactorship can work in lots of areas, but it takes big sales with low overhead. Uber snd Lyft make the money, the driver/owner gets the squeeze.
Tax collectors don’t like independents because they often end up owing, and cant pay. And regular taxi companies are getting hammered.
So we shall see. Uber and Lyft had better bring out the check books, ‘cause Daddy is hungry.
It's my opinion that skirting laws intended to protect employees by "contracting them independently" is unacceptable and should not be allowed.California passes Assembly Bill 5 for gig workers
Its my opinion that with very few exceptions, the people where the rubber hits the road aren’t making any money. Independent contactorship can work in lots of areas, but it takes big sales with low overhead. Uber snd Lyft make the money, the driver/owner gets the squeeze.
Tax collectors don’t like independents because they often end up owing, and cant pay. And regular taxi companies are getting hammered.
So we shall see. Uber and Lyft had better bring out the check books, ‘cause Daddy is hungry.
Part of Uber's argument is that driving cars is not a core component of their business.
If that doesn't get laughed out of court, I don't know what will.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?