# Do Uber Drivers Really Want to Be Full-Time Employees?



## ReviTULize (Sep 29, 2014)

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/07...a10e9f6e68cd8c0b543d457c1379e5&ts=1436475128#

3:00 pm ET
Jul 9, 2015
*Do Uber Drivers Really Want to Be Full-Time Employees?*
ByDOUGLAS MACMILLAN
A movement to reclassify hundreds of thousands of independent contractors in the on-demand app economy as full-time employees is gaining steam. But given a choice, would these workers really want to go full-time?

That question is coming into focus as Uber and other tech startups face legal challenges to their ability to rely on large workforces of independent contractors without providing them with the benefits enjoyed by full-time employees.

In a court filing Thursday, Uber submitted personal statements from 400 of its drivers in California who say they prefer their current status of independent contractor because it affords them flexibility in their schedule and the ability to work multiple jobs, among other factors.

The testimonies were submitted as part of Uber's opposition to a lawsuit, currently before a San Francisco judge, that seeks to prove Uber drivers are being treated like employees but compensated as contractors. The plaintiff is seeking class-action status for thousands of people who have driven for the ride-hailing service in California.

In essence, Uber is arguing the case should not be granted class-action status because a large portion of the people who fall into that class don't believe they should be labeled employees.

The "plaintiffs do not and cannot represent the interests of the thousands of other drivers who value the complete flexibility and autonomy they enjoy as independent contractors," Ted Boutrous, a partner in at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and Uber's outside counsel in the case, said in an emailed statement.

Flexibility is the new cherished buzzword to dozens of startups rushing to defend the legality of their employment models. Companies from Uber to Lyft to Postmates say they are pioneering a new gig economy where workers are free to clock in and out as easily as they open a smartphone app, helping many of them make time to care for a family or pursue an education or career.

But that flexibility comes at a cost to these workers, some of whom are unhappy with paying for their own health insurance and costs such as car maintenance and fuel. Last month, Uber was ordered to pay Barbara Berwick, a former San Francisco driver for Uber, more than $4,100 to cover the costs of vehicle mileage and tolls, after she argued successfully the company was so deeply involved in every aspect of her job that it was legally acting as an employer.

A few startups have recently taken steps to accommodate workers who prefer full-time employment. Instacart recently said it planned to classify its in-store shoppers, who trawl store aisles and bag groceries, as part-time employees. And on-demand delivery company Shyp said it plans to convert its hundreds of couriers in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Miami and New York to employees early next year.

Uber, the company with the most at stake in the debate, is standing its ground. It's now trying to show Berwick was an exception and that many drivers, if not most, prefer independence to employment. The company, which is raising new funding at a $50 billion valuation, has more than 200,000 active drivers in its network.

"I wouldn't even want to be an Uber employee," Christopher Martinez, an Uber driver in Los Angeles, said in the declarations Uber filed in court. "I am familiar with all of the work regulations applicable to employer-employee relationships in California through my previous job at Coca-Cola KO +0.15%, and I have no interest in going back to that situation."

In its court brief, Uber also pointed to the results of a survey it commissioned earlier this year which showed about three-fourths of its drivers prefer a job where they can set their own schedule rather than a 9-to-5 job with benefits and salary. That study, conducted by market researcher Benenson Strategy Group, drew on the company's own data as well as a survey of 601 drivers.

But some of those drivers may just dislike the idea of working full time for Uber. Javier Calix, a driver in San Francisco, said in an interview that he would not take a full-time job offered by Uber because the company doesn't pay him enough for that to make economic sense. While he said he used to make around $25 an hour, after gas and other expenses, when he first started driving for the service two years ago, that's now down to about $15 an hour after all the fees Uber takes out of his pay.

"I wouldn't be able to afford it," Calix said of the prospect of full-time Uber employment.

The next hearing for the case against Uber seeking class-action status is Aug. 6.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher (Dec 7, 2014)

ReviTULize said:


> http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/07...a10e9f6e68cd8c0b543d457c1379e5&ts=1436475128#
> 
> 3:00 pm ET
> Jul 9, 2015
> ...


POST # 1/@ReviTULize:Bostonian Bison
Thanks You for this
Hyperlinked Article of Interest to ALL
UPNFers.

More Importantly You are Following
in the Tradition of #1 Notable and
Original "NewsMeister" chi1cabby,
who began a Marathon of 46 Weeks ×
15 News Story Posts/day back on
28 May 2014.

Bison Ponders...how much the Spiff
was for Each "....contributing CA.
Driver."?

"...and here is Your ☆☆☆☆☆☆ Plaque."
{Awarded with a TP Square Schmeared
by his August Exigency.}

Bison Chortling.


----------



## LAuberX (Jun 3, 2014)

They would rather have flexibility and no money than a full time job with benefits?

B.S.


----------



## aaadock (Jun 7, 2015)

people wanna be employed by a company worth 50 billion.
they think the benefits will be good 

most people are sheep , wanting to be lead somewhere

thats why,,

no other reason . 


they are mistaken,. 

if they win that battle we all lose.


----------



## D Town (Apr 8, 2015)

If you want loyal workers - either independent contractors or employees - don't treat them like sh*t. The REASON I don't do Uber full time is because they refuse to pay me what I'm worth full time so they get my scraps when I feel like working with them. Flexibility has its perks but since I have a full time job with a set schedule its obvious I have no objections to being an employee and show I even PREFER that to flexibility since they get most of my time, energy, and loyalty.


----------



## LAuberX (Jun 3, 2014)

I do feel like a sheep owned by a teen aged boy.... Maybe Travis was raised on a farm


----------



## William1964 (Jul 28, 2015)

I'm not an employee. I am a business owner. I recently hired a full time employee to sit in the front seat handing out pretzels and to pour coffee for the passengers. 

Sweet deal...


----------



## glados (May 23, 2015)

Would you rather be an IC or not be able to Uber?

Uber won't have any full time employment positions for drivers. At worst, they will pull out of the US market entirely and focus 100% on very large overseas markets like China, India, etc.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

IF you drive full time for UBER, you SHOULD want employee status.

That way, when they DEACTIVATE your account, you collect full time UNEMPLOYMENT.


----------



## Realityshark (Sep 22, 2014)

I don't think it matters what a handful of drivers want or don't want. The issue at hand is that Uber uses the classification of independent contractors to their advantage and illegally.

Independent contractors can make their own rates.
Independent contractors are not held hostage by an unfair rating system.
Independent contactors are able to bill their client for expenses. Fuel, mileage etc.
Independent contractors can choose their clients. Uber threatens you with deactivation for too many cancellations.
Independent contrators are free to create their own business model. If that business model is to be able to accept tips, then that is their right.

Uber wants the classification of independent contractors for their benefit, but does not want to give any benefits of that classification to their drivers.

For the record, I do not wish to be employed by Uber. part time or full time. I cannot imagine what evil things they would do if we were classified as employees. Uber is a no win proposition. Their corporate culture is to screw over their drivers. They could have been a company that treated their work force respectfully. Instead, they have gone the route of being ruthless corporate pigs who exploit anything and anyone that they possibly can. I hope that Karma catches up with all of the upper management that has decided to treat human beings so horribly.


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

Uber drivers OF COURSE want independence contractor status because it gives them an outstanding edge over the taxi industry


----------



## merkurfan (Jul 20, 2015)

ReviTULize said:


> http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/07...a10e9f6e68cd8c0b543d457c1379e5&ts=1436475128#
> 
> 3:00 pm ET
> Jul 9, 2015
> ...


Nope, but as a contractor I want to be in control the way it is suppose to be. That means I set my rates.


----------



## TwoFiddyMile (Mar 13, 2015)

riChElwAy said:


> Uber drivers OF COURSE want independence contractor status because it gives them an outstanding edge over the taxi industry


Is this sarcasm?
18 years in the cab business, I've been the ultimate IC.
In fact, in my current "radio company" relationship, the meter is independent of the computer.
If I have my own client, I dont have to be logged in to service them.

If you REALLY wanted to be ICs, you'd operate a vehicle which was licensed in a manner that you did not have to rely on a dispatch service. 
THATS why UberX doesn't let you have livery plates/insurance- complete control.


----------



## UberPartnerDennis (Jun 21, 2015)

Being an employee means uber tells you when and where you work. No thank you


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

TwoFiddyMile said:


> Is this sarcasm?
> 18 years in the cab business, I've been the ultimate IC.
> In fact, in my current "radio company" relationship, the meter is independent of the computer.
> If I have my own client, I dont have to be logged in to service them.
> ...


most drivers prefer the IC status but they don't realize they're getting screwed because they're being treating like employees


----------



## uberissohonest (Aug 7, 2015)

riChElwAy said:


> Uber drivers OF COURSE want independence contractor status because it gives them an outstanding edge over the taxi industry


most cab companies have independent contractor drivers.


----------



## uberissohonest (Aug 7, 2015)

UberPartnerDennis said:


> Being an employee means uber tells you when and where you work. No thank you


by having an "acceptance rate", they basically already are. i don't think the issue is that any driver wants employee status, it's that we ARE BEING TREATED like employees. uber cant have its cake and eat it too.


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

uberissohonest said:


> most cab companies have independent contractor drivers.


taxi drivers are not treated like employees .. Uber drivers are


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

uberissohonest said:


> by having an "acceptance rate", they basically already are. i don't think the issue is that any driver wants employee status, it's that we ARE BEING TREATED like employees. uber cant have its cake and eat it too.


omfg you just absolutely nailed it i need to copy and paste this to my brain


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Realityshark said:


> I don't think it matters what a handful of drivers want or don't want. The issue at hand is that Uber uses the classification of independent contractors to their advantage and illegally.


(I know - late to the thread, but...)
Exactly.
What most don't understand is the Fair Labor and Standards Act (FLSA) speicifically states that there are some benefits that workers do not have the right to 'waive'... 
for example, a worker does not have the right to agree to work for less than minimum wage - or to forgo overtime pay due.
This is how Congress prevents those with power (employers) from exploiting those with no power (employees).

The point being, that any ruling by a judge on worker classification would not look at this as a popularity contest. It doesn't matter if all Uber drivers said they wanted to be ICs. That's not what's at issue. What is before the court, is if Uber extends enough control over workers and those jobs to be held liable for treating those performing the work as 'essential' to the business - which would make them employees... not ICs.


----------



## pasadenauber (Jan 16, 2015)

Casuale Haberdasher said:


> POST # 1/@ReviTULize:Bostonian Bison
> Thanks You for this
> Hyperlinked Article of Interest to ALL
> UPNFers.
> ...


Bison you post the craziest shit online lol..


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> (I know - late to the thread, but...)
> Exactly.
> What most don't understand is the Fair Labor and Standards Act (FLSA) speicifically states that there are some benefits that workers do not have the right to 'waive'...
> for example, a worker does not have the right to agree to work for less than minimum wage - or to forgo overtime pay due.
> ...


This is correct.

I would add to it that the court may rule that Uber is in violation of law, but only in regards to a percentage of the drivers. The court may rule that those that are not driving for Uber as their primary source of income may continue to operate as ICs. If the driver relies on Uber as their primary income, then Uber can't ignore labor laws regarding that driver's relationship with Uber.

If this happens, then Uber would just deactivate any driver who can't prove they have income that exceeds what they earn from Uber. From what I understand this would be a minority of drivers... but it may affect a majority of rides currently being given.


----------



## riChElwAy (Jan 13, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> (I know - late to the thread, but...)
> Exactly.
> What most don't understand is the Fair Labor and Standards Act (FLSA) speicifically states that there are some benefits that workers do not have the right to 'waive'...
> for example, a worker does not have the right to agree to work for less than minimum wage - or to forgo overtime pay due.
> ...


and a vitally important ingredient is the unfair competitive advantage that this misclassification provides to the cheating side


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

UberHammer said:


> This is correct.
> I would add to it that the court may rule that Uber is in violation of law, but only in regards to a percentage of the drivers. The court may rule that those that are not driving for Uber as their primary source of income may continue to operate as ICs. If the driver relies on Uber as their primary income, then Uber can't ignore labor laws regarding that driver's relationship with Uber.
> If this happens, then Uber would just deactivate any driver who can't prove they have income that exceeds what they earn from Uber. From what I understand this would be a minority of drivers... but it may affect a majority of rides currently being given.


I personally believe that while Uber likley *thinks* that's the worst that could happen, that no court will use that standard.

IMO, (not that my opinion is worth anything) as long as Uber exerts the kind of control over the job and the worker as it does now, it won't matter to the court if that worker is working for Uber for 10 minutes or 10 years, part-time or full-time. Under current IRS regulations, there is no distinction that I know of that determines worker classification by 'time' or 'significance to the workers income' (with the sole exception of "causal child care").


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I personally believe that while Uber likley *thinks* that's the worst that could happen, that no court will use that standard.
> 
> IMO, (not that my opinion is worth anything) as long as Uber exerts the kind of control over the job and the worker as it does now, it won't matter to the court if that worker is working for Uber for 10 minutes or 10 years, part-time or full-time. Under current IRS regulations, there is no distinction that I know of that determines worker classification by 'time' or 'significance to the workers income' (with the sole exception of "causal child care").


I hope you're right. I'd much prefer that outcome.

I have a bad feeling that Uber has too many resources in high places for the court to do what it's supposed to do. I expect some kind of compromise somewhere in the middle where Uber can continue status quo, but the risk to society, that social safety nets exist to protect society from, is minimized.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

LAuberX said:


> They would rather have flexibility and no money than a full time job with benefits?
> 
> B.S.


Whomever said we want to be full-time. This is a BS article. I think most drivers want is to make decent money with minimal risk and have more control over how we do it....


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

UberHammer said:


> I have a bad feeling that Uber has too many resources in high places for the court to do what it's supposed to do.


Don't forget that the case in CA Federal Court has been approved for JURY trial. 
Ain't no clout with a jury.
Judge Chen has already said it doesn't matter much what happens in his court - he knows the losing party will appeal. 
Knowing that, Chen has no reason not to attempt to cut through the BS and make the parties adjudicate the issues.


----------

