# "Uber's Big Lie"



## VictorD (Apr 30, 2017)

As though we didn't already know...

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/09/uber-misclassification-gig-economy-taxi-workers-alliance

"Uber's most undeserved reputation is that it's a technology company. It's not."

"Misclassifying drivers as independent contractors and not employees allows Uber to weasel out of billions of dollars in costs... "

"There is a fundamental contradiction between the claim that drivers are independent contractors and the amount of quality control that Uber exerts over drivers... "

"Its whole valuation is based on a very consciously created brand built around providing a certain quality of product and customer experience, a certain access to a network of drivers, a certain pricing system that is set centrally. I look at all that and say that is employment."

"There is no economic reality to Uber drivers operating their own businesses independent from the company, but that is the political fiction that Uber has been able to maintain. There is little wonder how. Uber is backed by some of the most powerful firms on Wall Street, such as Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and BlackRock." *(editorial: what was left out of this assessment was how Uber has been so easily been able to control public perception with the help of a very compliant national media due to the presence and influence of Arianna Huffington - principle investor and Board member at Uber who owns The Huffington Post, one of the most prominent and influential news organizations in the country.)
*
"Uber's business model isn't based on new technology, but corporate greed and worker exploitation that has been aided and abetted by a political system that has failed to hold the company accountable to basic employment standards."

Discuss.


----------



## uberdriverfornow (Jan 10, 2016)

lodged towards the end of the article is ...



> The union is now organizing to establish universal standards in the industry: setting the fare charged by taxis as the floor and mandating that all drivers receive at least 80 percent of the rate charged or initially quoted - whichever is higher.


This is the best part of the article, not even the vehicle cap. This is the key to tnc drivers making a living wage.

This would destroy Uber and Lyft's pool nonsense. The fare would go back to the driver, instead of Uber and Lyft making most of the profit.


----------



## heynow321 (Sep 3, 2015)

Glad To see some honest reporting for once


----------



## Mista T (Aug 16, 2017)

Many of us who have been here for a while already know this very well.

The "big lie" of IC status is but one of MANY major lies and half truths.


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

I've been involved in the IC/employee mess for > 30 years. Back then, the IRS was the only agency to be concerned with. Their general rule is than an individual is an IC if the payer (Uber) has the right to control or direct only the result of the work, not what will be done and how it will be done. Uber wants the result to be the driver giving a ride to a specific rider to a specific location. Uber does not mandate a route. Uber does not mandate any type of speech. Uber does not mandate the tools to be used as long as the tools meets a certain minimum qualifications (4 door car that is newer than x years old).

The IRS attempt to clarify the classification by looking at 3 categories - behavior control, financial control, and relationship of the parties. 

Behavior control of an employee would be telling the drivers when to drive, where to drive, and how long to drive. Uber does not do this to its ICs. Training a worker on how to do the job is an indicator of an employee. Uber does not offer driver training.

Financial control includes the investment in the equipment the worker uses. Drivers have the large investment in a car, Uber doesn't. ICs are more likely to have unreimbursed expenses. ICs have the opportunity for profit or loss. ICs are free to seek out other business opportunities. Uber doesn't prevent drivers from driving for Lyft, for example. An employee is generally guarenteed a regular wage, salary or commission. ICs are paid by the job. 

Relationship between the parties include things like benefits to employees. ICs generally get no benefits. An expectation that the relationship will continue indefinitely, rather than for a specific project or period, is generally seen as evidence for an employee. The Uber/driver relationship can be viewed as over after every ride given. 

I believe these tests make drivers ICs, not employees, at least for IRS purposes.

Does anyone think the Taxi Workers Alliance has Uber driver's interest in mind? They have taxi workers best interest in mind. While competition is good for the consumer and the economy, competition in an industry could mean the death of one company or another. Realtors don't want more realtors just as drivers don't want more drivers. If the minimum Uber could charge was the taxi rate, why choose an Uber over a waiting taxi? What would happen to Walmart if the minimum they could charge for an item is what their competition charges? It would be a loss for Walmart, the consumer, and eventually, the economy. 

Get government out of businesses. Government should be involved in settling disputes but not in choosing who wins and who loses. Let the market decide what a ride is worth. Let the market decide what a driver is worth. Free markets are self correcting.


----------



## westsidebum (Feb 7, 2015)

bsliv said:


> I've been involved in the IC/employee mess for > 30 years. Back then, the IRS was the only agency to be concerned with. Their general rule is than an individual is an IC if the payer (Uber) has the right to control or direct only the result of the work, not what will be done and how it will be done. Uber wants the result to be the driver giving a ride to a specific rider to a specific location. Uber does not mandate a route. Uber does not mandate any type of speech. Uber does not mandate the tools to be used as long as the tools meets a certain minimum qualifications (4 door car that is newer than x years old).
> 
> The IRS attempt to clarify the classification by looking at 3 categories - behavior control, financial control, and relationship of the parties.
> 
> ...


The IRS does not regulate labor. The IRS standard is not relevant as it relates more to tax liability rather than labor law and social responsibility. The most relevant classification is quoted in the article under the federal department of labor. In fact the former head of dept of labor said it was a huge mistake to overlook Uber/lyfts abuse of the labor laws during the Obama administration. In otherwards the department of labor had cause to go after uber but didn't because the companies were not big enough and there were larger corporate abusers at that time. This is all fact and based on published articles


----------



## SEAL Team 5 (Dec 19, 2015)

VictorD said:


> "Uber's business model isn't based on new technology, but corporate greed and worker exploitation that has been aided and abetted by a political system that has failed to hold the company accountable to basic employment standards."
> 
> Discuss.


Uber's business model has always been exactly like a majority of the taxi companies with the exception of the independent driving contractor now owns his/her vehicle instead of leasing one from the taxi company.

Uber is still fare for hire, but instead of calling a taxi dispatcher and verbally requesting a ride you now just have to download an app and press a button.

The greatest aspect of Uber is that the company easily convinced over a million Americans that you can "Make Great Money....Be Your Own Boss" if you just "Get Your Side Hustle On". Don't fault Uber for the ignorance of everyone that joined to drive. Drivers should have just done a little research in regards to operating costs, insurance and legal liability. You can't blame Uber for capitalizing on the stupidity and laziness of Americans.

Caveat Emptor.


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

westsidebum said:


> The IRS does not regulate labor. The IRS standard is not relevant as it relates more to tax liability rather than labor law and social responsibility. The most relevant classification is quoted in the article under the federal department of labor. In fact the former head of dept of labor said it was a huge mistake to overlook Uber/lyfts abuse of the labor laws during the Obama administration. In otherwards the department of labor had cause to go after uber but didn't because the companies were not big enough and there were larger corporate abusers at that time. This is all fact and based on published articles


Are you suggesting there are multiple federal standards when determining IC vs employee? Who gets to choose the standard?

I researched the USDOL and Uber and couldn't find any references. Have a link?

Seems to me if two people do the same service and get paid the same fee but one makes money while the other loses money, they are in a business. Not many employees lose money from their job. Not many employees can increase their net income while their gross income remains steady. Not many employees can work an hour a year and remain on equal footing with their colleagues. Employees get fired for not doing their job. Uber drivers can ignore or cancel a ride. Employees aren't in direct competition with each other. In fact, employees are often organized for collective bargaining. If a company hires more employees, it generally helps the existing employees by reducing their workload. When additional ICs get added, existing ICs have reduced expected income due to competition for a limited rider pool.

Forget the contradictory rules, common sense says TNC drivers are ICs.

What social responsibility does a business have? Don't commit fraud. They have no duty to provide good prices to their customers (but if they don't they will be short lived). They have no duty to provide high wages (and if they do they may be short lived). Businesses have a responsibility to their investors. The investors want a return on their investment. The business attempts to get the return by selling goods or services at a price that will generate a profit. That is business. The strong survive and the inefficient die.

People have a social responsibility not businesses. There is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, good for them and good for those that get helped. I don't expect a Microsoft Foundation to do the same thing. In fact, the stockholders would probably fire whoever tried to start such a foundation and rightly so.



SEAL Team 5 said:


> You can't blame Uber for capitalizing on the stupidity and laziness of Americans.


Bene dictum.


----------



## SLuz (Oct 20, 2016)

bsliv said:


> Let the market decide what a driver is worth. Free markets are self correcting.


Oh my a libertarian pipe dreamer. Did you see how the "free market" self corrected as Glass- Steagle regulations were removed from the banking industry? How'd that work out? Who built the roads that drivers drive on and Uber and Lyft utilize? Hell why regulate traffic? Forget those pesky stop signs and burdensome red lights and lanes? The strong will survive and the weak will die via violent car crashes ...uhh I mean self regulation.


----------



## heynow321 (Sep 3, 2015)

i kinda wish a good chunk of the population would self regulate themselves right off a cliff.


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

SLuz said:


> Oh my a libertarian pipe dreamer.


You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. I hope some day you'll join us, and the world will be as one.



SLuz said:


> Did you see how the "free market" self corrected as Glass- Steagle regulations were removed from the banking industry?


Are you suggesting it caused the recession of '08? If so, you're wrong.



SLuz said:


> Who built the roads that drivers drive on and Uber and Lyft utilize?


Are you suggesting road building is so complicated that only a government can do it? Do you know there are many thousands of miles of private roads in this country alone? In my city, its easy to tell a private from a public road. The private roads are well maintained.



SLuz said:


> Hell why regulate traffic?


Because driving a car is a dangerous activity to those around the driver. If you want to go 160 mph on a deserted central Nevada road, go ahead. No one at a stop sign? Treat it as a yield sign.

Use some common sense.

ps.
Traffic laws are not business regulations.


----------



## everythingsuber (Sep 29, 2015)

bsliv said:


> I've been involved in the IC/employee mess for > 30 years. Back then, the IRS was the only agency to be concerned with. Their general rule is than an individual is an IC if the payer (Uber) has the right to control or direct only the result of the work, not what will be done and how it will be done. Uber wants the result to be the driver giving a ride to a specific rider to a specific location. Uber does not mandate a route. Uber does not mandate any type of speech. Uber does not mandate the tools to be used as long as the tools meets a certain minimum qualifications (4 door car that is newer than x years old).
> 
> The IRS attempt to clarify the classification by looking at 3 categories - behavior control, financial control, and relationship of the parties.
> 
> ...


There's more to it than that.
If we rely on the market to do what is decent ***** slaves would still be working in cotton fields.


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

everythingsuber said:


> There's more to it than that.
> If we rely on the market to do what is decent ***** slaves would still be working in cotton fields.


"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." _T. Jefferson
_
I don't care what other's ancestry is, they are entitled to equal rights and their own rightful liberty.


----------



## 125928 (Oct 5, 2017)

But yet we still drive. There is an old saying that goes. "if you find a sucker, lick it". People who drive allow themselves to be exploited by Uber/Lyft. But driving on weekends allow me to earn what I need, when I want to drive. No other part-time job can offer me that.


----------



## Koolbreze (Feb 13, 2017)

VictorD said:


> As though we didn't already know...
> 
> https://www.jacobinmag.com/2018/09/uber-misclassification-gig-economy-taxi-workers-alliance
> 
> ...


You are an IC. If you don't like the money you are making....get busy. You think Uber will pay you for doing nothing? You not making any money....start working


----------



## SEAL Team 5 (Dec 19, 2015)

bsliv said:


> You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. I hope some day you'll join us, and the world will be as one.


John Lennon, right?


----------



## bsliv (Mar 1, 2016)

SEAL Team 5 said:


> John Lennon, right?


It seemed appropriate to 'borrow' the leftists words for a reasonable policy.


----------



## Taxi Driver in Arizona (Mar 18, 2015)

I thought Uber's big lie was the one about them being profitable someday.


----------



## heynow321 (Sep 3, 2015)

Taxi Driver in Arizona said:


> I thought Uber's big lie was the one about them being profitable someday.


That is the other big lie


----------



## Stevie The magic Unicorn (Apr 3, 2018)

Taxi Driver in Arizona said:


> I thought Uber's big lie was the one about them being profitable someday.


I thought that the "big Lie" was that there was only 1 Big lie?


----------

