• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

California passes landmark bill that threatens to upend companies like Uber and Lyft

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.



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.
 
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?
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?
 
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.



I'm talking about how independent contracting is abused as in the case of Uber drivers. If you're a painting contractor, the law will not affect you from conducting business as you do. My bet is you would not buy into an Uber type "independent" contractor arrangement. You would not feel, you would not have a strong sense of being, independent.
 
Fail again. An Uber driver is exactly the definition of an independent contractor. You may not like it, but that's the facts.
Repeating the same crap unsupported crap will not make it real.
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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.

37 hours a week is not really part time but in most cases is like working a FT job.
 
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?



"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.
 
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.

Sounds pretty vague to me. An Uber driver is an independent contractor.
 
"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.
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.
 
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

Uber will go bankrupt and cease operations long before self-driving cars are feasible.
 
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.

It's how the world worked before all those job-killing regulations came up.
 
Sounds pretty vague to me. An Uber driver is an independent contractor.

Only because Uber called them that in order to bypass a bunch of employment law.
 
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.

This isn't how it was supposed to be. Uber and Lyft could have been simple apps that linked driver and passenger together, facilitated the payment, and maintained a review page so people could see who they were riding with. At best they should only have taken like 2-5% of the transaction to cover their operating costs. But they take ****ing 25% commission! And they have "fees" on top of that! The drivers who have to pay for the vehicle and gas get squat.

The ride sharing companies got greedy. And the money people started investing and then wanted to know they would get a return on that investment.

Seems like drivers and riders would flock to a ride sharing service that didn't take 25%. Maybe I'll start one. That's the beauty here. All you need is an app.
 
Sounds pretty vague to me. An Uber driver is an independent contractor.


Not so vague. It was crafted from an April 2018 CA Superior Court decision on misclassification of independent contractors. It got Uber's attention. They are promising to put an opposing bill on the 2020 ballot. Uber already paid $20M in May 2019 to their "independent" contractors, who wanted to be classified as employees, for Uber to avoid having to go to court where, after the 2018 decision, they obviously saw the chance they could lose the whole ball of wax. So, under the current Uber contract/"partner" agreement, the driver will not be considered an independent. If Uber changes the agreement and the driver's business is thus arranged to meet the new definition, the Uber driver will then be considered independent.
 
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.



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.
 
Only because Uber called them that in order to bypass a bunch of employment law.

No, they meet the criteria for being independent contractors. If Uber is such a bad deal, if the drivers are actually losing money, the company will eventually fold, as they won't be able to get people to contract as drivers anymore. I suspect that lots of Uber drivers don't have much in the way of marketable skills, and this is at least an opportunity for them.

We wouldn't be in this gig economy if it hadn't been made so difficult for employers to hire people, fire people and benefit costs shot through the roof. While I taught high school full time I was an adjunct instructor at a nearby state college. Some of my fellow adjunct instructors has three or four local colleges they taught at, because there were no full time jobs. Colleges don't hire very many full time professors anymore. College instruction is becoming gig work. So I was amazed when the college did offer me a full time, tenured track professor position. I worked there another seven years. In that seven years, I did not see another full time professor hired.

BTW: if I were Uber I would just make all the drivers part time. No benefits, no protections. Just not so good for the driver wanting to work over 40 hours.
 
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 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.
 
It's how the world worked before all those job-killing regulations came up.
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.
 
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.

Uber blatantly discriminates against political dissidents, so if their fellow liberals want to screw them over, I fully support that.
 
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.

I don;t know how they've been doin this by getting around the licensing requirements. Cab drivers have to have chauffeur's licenses in order to charge the public to ride.

Uber and Lyft both say "they ain't gonna do it, but yes they will in California or they won't do business here. The company has been spreading the propaganda that trucks are going to lose work and that notion's about as stupid as they guy who said it.
 
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.
or...something like that.

I'm interested in seeing how this plays out.
 
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.

It's true. Uber doesn't drive cars. They put people who want a ride in touch with people who are willing to give them a ride for a fee. Uber cannot tell any driver "You must take this fare."

Uber does not tell it's drivers "You must drive from hour A to hour B." The drivers work whenever and wherever they want. When they are tired of working, they turn off the app and they are done.

Some drivers choose to work only during peak hours in peak locations, such as when and where major sporting events let out. Others work every day from an airport or train station. Others work the bar scene at closing time. The choice is the driver's, and they don't have to clear their choice through the rideshare company in advance.
 
A law will be written based on the paradigm of today.

Good lawyers will review the approved law and modify the algorithms/accounting/money transfer to subvert the laws.

The private industry and the rich have much more intelligent people than the masses elect into office to protect them.

This is all theater to appease the masses of the politicians they have (serving) them. Politicians serve the donors list they cultivate and nurture thru their careers. Uber drivers are not on that list. Uber Drivers are on the list of tax payers and that is where they should be concerned with any additional laws passed.

The end result is this. POliticians want to attain more power. That power is attained thru control of a large public treasury, not attaining 100% of the vote of a homeless population. Most politicians can get 1005 of the homeless population vote by just simply lying to them. It is much more difficult to lie to donors for more money.
 
Back
Top Bottom