# Oregon Labor Bureau clarifies Uber drivers' employee status



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

*http://www.statesmanjournal.com/sto...rifies-uber-drivers-employee-status/73934988/*


----------



## Old Rocker (Aug 20, 2015)

I wonder if cab drivers in Oregon are ICs or employees. Anyone know?


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

They blatantly lie about earning potential, then cut the rate and raise their cut at will after people have invested in a car.

That alone qualifies Uber drivers as employees. Freedom my ass. They're Serfs.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

Old Rocker said:


> I wonder if cab drivers in Oregon are ICs or employees. Anyone know?


I'd say most cab drivers are ICs. This article has some details:
*Labor commissioner: Uber drivers are employees, warrant employee benefits*


----------



## Hackenstein (Dec 16, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> I'd say most cab drivers are ICs. This article has some details:
> *Labor commissioner: Uber drivers are employees, warrant employee benefits*


Makes sense, because local government sets the rate of fare for cabs. There's no constant screwing with people's lives and an endless lie-based PR campaign to recruit the next wave of suckers.


----------



## Old Rocker (Aug 20, 2015)

So, my Socratic question of the day is, wouldn't the same ruling apply to cab drivers since they lease their vehicles from the cab company.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

Old Rocker said:


> So, my Socratic question of the day is, wouldn't the same ruling apply to cab drivers since they lease their vehicles from the cab company.


It could. But the distinction between employee & ICs is about more than leasing cabs from the cab companies. 
It's about the Degree of Control exercised by the companies over drivers.


----------



## KeJorn (Oct 3, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> *http://www.statesmanjournal.com/sto...rifies-uber-drivers-employee-status/73934988/*


An advisory opinion released Wednesday by the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries reviewed six factors:

*(1) Degree of Control*: _Whether the worker is running his or her own business or dependent on the employer,_
*(2) Relative Investments: *_Who spends what so the worker can do the job,_
*(3) Worker's Profit and Loss: *_A worker's ability to profit or lose money,_
*(4) Skills and Initiative: *_The job's dependence on business skills (judgment, initiative) beyond technical work skills,_
*(5) Permanence:* _How long the job is expected to last_
*(6) Work As Integral Part of Business*: _How critical to a business' core function is the job._

On all six factors, Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian concluded that an *Uber or Lyft drivers appear to be an employee, rather than a contractor.*

_"These six factors from the economic realities test illustrate how Uber drivers are not operating their own separate businesses with the degree of autonomy one expects with an independent contractor. To the contrary, the rigorous hiring process, the highly controlled directions as to how work is to be performed and at what price, the expectation of long term employment, the insignificant investment of the driver when compared to the massive infrastructure provided by Uber and the integral nature of the driver's work to the business are all characteristic of an employment relationship."_


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Oct 15, 2015 -
Oregon Bureau of Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian stated:
"Oregon's worker protections are in place for a reason -
When corporations misclassify an employee, the worker is denied basic protections such as the right to be paid on time and in full."

hmmmm...
no where I have I heard that before...
LOL...

May 23. 2015 -
UberPepople.net
"Labor laws exist for a reason: they prevent exploitation.
Driver's ARE being exploited, whether they know it or not - whether they like it or not - whether they agree to it or not."
http://tinyurl.com/q88nrmn​
Oct 15, 2015
"Radio Cab driver Darin Campbell, ... would prefer a combination or hybrid model that takes the best of being an employee and being an independent contractor. "I think there's room to take pieces of both."

that sounds familiar, too:

Sept 24, 2015
UberPepople.net
"Hopefully, the long term outcome of all of this will be that Uber creates two classes of drivers: IC's and W2 employees... 
allowing drivers to choose how they want to work and how they want to be classified (and accept the terms of each of those classifications). 
For example, a part-time employee might agree to be "on-app" a minimum of 20 hours per week, 
while a full-time employee might agree to 40 hours of "on-app"time. 
A driver who wants to maintain full control and flexibility of how much and when they work, might opt to be an independent contractor."
http://tinyurl.com/neortpr​


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

KeJorn said:


> *(3) Worker's Profit and Loss: *_A worker's ability to profit or lose money,_


Thanks for posting that:
I completely forgot about the P&L test... 
Shame on me - that was the determining factor in one of the situations I had to deal with not long ago.
Drivers have no control over the fare amount - and therefore cannot control their P&L since they also have no (or little) control over the majority of their expenses.


----------



## KeJorn (Oct 3, 2014)

KeJorn said:


> An advisory opinion released Wednesday by the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries reviewed six factors:
> 
> *(1) Degree of Control*: _Whether the worker is running his or her own business or dependent on the employer,_
> *(2) Relative Investments: *_Who spends what so the worker can do the job,_
> ...


I posted this, because I think we need to send this information in to every city and state that Uber and Lyft operate in.
We would ask those city/state officials to review Oregon's assessment and modify it and/or make whatever changes necessary to apply to that specific state and make a final determination of whether drivers would be considered employees or independent contractors in that locale based on that information.

The goal is NOT to be labeled employees. 
It is to identify the DISCREPANCIES with how Uber works with it's drivers.
It is to help us demand change, based on these factors.

It is in THEIR best interest to allow us to remain Independent Contractors.
Most if not all of us, want to remain Independent Contractors.

However, we want change. And this is ONE way to identify HOW they will need to change it to comply with each city/state (so that we are comparing apples to apples).

Thoughts?


----------



## KeJorn (Oct 3, 2014)

*This too is a possibility and perhaps something the NLRB needs to decide on, based in part on what they discussed here:*




__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=516435551852276


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

KeJorn said:


> I posted this, because I think we need to send this information in to every city and state that Uber and Lyft operate in.
> We would ask those city/state officials to review Oregon's assessment and modify it and/or make whatever changes necessary to apply to that specific state and make a final determination of whether drivers would be considered employees or independent contractors in that locale based on that information.
> 
> The goal is NOT to be labeled employees.
> ...


I can't (and won't) paint with that broad a brush.
There are over 1 million Uber drivers (plus whatever Lyft drivers) in the US. I don't think you can say "The goal is NOT to be labeled employees" - because some drivers DO want to be employees - or at least have the protections afforded to employees under federal (FLSA) law. A lobbying effort and agenda must take ALL driver's into account, or it becomes a self-centered agenda that will fail do to objections from one segment or another.


----------



## Old Rocker (Aug 20, 2015)

Every time I mention this I get flamed (and maybe rightfully so) that I can't know what would happen...

If we were to become Uber employees, they could and would tell us where to work, what shifts to work, how to dress, and all of the other controls employers have over employees. We'd have a boss we hated who placed unreasonable expectations upon us because he or she was trying to climb the corporate ladder and get that corner office in a skyscraper overlooking his or her demesne.


IMHO


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Old Rocker said:


> Every time I mention this I get flamed (and maybe rightfully so) that I can't know what would happen...
> If we were to become Uber employees, they could and would tell us where to work, what shifts to work, how to dress, and all of the other controls employers have over employees. We'd have a boss we hated who placed unreasonable expectations upon us because he or she was trying to climb the corporate ladder and get that corner office in a skyscraper overlooking his or her demesne.
> IMHO


I know that's your opinion - and it may very well come to that
- but it DOES NOT HAVE TO.

(and this is NOT a flame!)

Uber can structure an employee relationship any way they want
- and one thing that I CAN guarantee to you, is that if push comes to shove,
they will do it in the least expensive way possible.

I just hired 60+ employees in one state.
They have NO guaranteed hours.
They accept the work assignments they want to accept.
They turn down the assignments they don't want.
(If I had hired only 4 people, then I couldn't offer that kind of flexibility!)
They get paid only for the work they do.
When they get paid, taxes are withheld as per tax law, unemployment and workers comp insurance is paid - and so is 1/2 of the SSI.
I haven't gotten there yet with this group, but if/when I do, based on their hours, they will be eligible for health insurance per the ACA.

I should also mention that the only reason they are classified as employees is because I need to provide general liability insurance in order for them to do the work they do.


----------



## Old Rocker (Aug 20, 2015)

Michael - Cleveland said:


> I know that's your opinion - and it may very well come to that
> - but it DOES NOT HAVE TO.
> 
> (and this is NOT a flame!)
> ...


One can only hope.

(I enjoy our discussions, btw. Your comments are always well thought out.)


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Old Rocker said:


> Every time I mention this I get flamed (and maybe rightfully so) that I can't know what would happen...
> 
> If we were to become Uber employees, they could and would tell us where to work, what shifts to work, how to dress, and all of the other controls employers have over employees. We'd have a boss we hated who placed unreasonable expectations upon us because he or she was trying to climb the corporate ladder and get that corner office in a skyscraper overlooking his or her demesne.
> 
> IMHO


No because Uber could not POSSIBLY afford to have that many employees and they can't get rid of a huge portion of them or their system falls apart. Plus they would have to pay unemployment to those they did lay off at that point.

Their ONLY feasible move woukd be to agree to treat us like true independent contractors from that point on.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> No because Uber could not POSSIBLY afford to have that many employees and they can't get rid of a huge portion of them or their system falls apart. Plus they would have to pay unemployment to those they did lay off at that point.
> Their ONLY feasible move woukd be to agree to treat us like true independent contractors from that point on.


Too many people seem to think that the options for Uber are all black & white:
employee with strcit work hours and controls in place,
or independent contractors over which they have no control.
That's just not the case.
There are a myriad of ways Uber could (and likely WILL end up) structuring the driver base to accommodate full-time drivers, part-time drivers, employees and independent contractors.
Uber's options (and those of the entire gig/on-demand economy) are 50 shades of Gray.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

FlDriver said:


> To anyone who understands business, we clearly are independent contractors. We supply our own vehicles. We work when and where we want. We can take time off without asking. We are never told to work a specific schedule. We can drive for half an hour or all day. We can even turn down rides that we are offered or tell Uber not to charge a specific customer.
> 
> We aren't being exploited. If you think you are, stop driving! No one is forcing you to drive for Uber. Uber is paying me exactly as promised, including crediting me for tolls I paid and no-show riders. They never promised me any specific hourly or daily earnings- common sense says that will vary depending on the demand for rides, where people want to go, traffic delays, etc. There is no job anywhere I know of that is this flexible. When I have a true job, I can't just go in for an hour or two whenever I feel like it. I have to show up when the boss wants me to.
> 
> Obviously, if we accept a ride, we have to go where the person is and take them where they want to go, but that is inherent in the service of giving rides.


Your opinion is obviously yours to hold...
but you are wrong on every single point.
How many rides have you done for Uber - how long have you been driving rideshare? How many fare cuts have you been through?


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

Old Rocker said:


> So, my Socratic question of the day is, wouldn't the same ruling apply to cab drivers since they lease their vehicles from the cab company.


^^^
I drive for a limo service but I look at is sort of a glorified taxi... and by the way, my company owns a few cab companies here in Vegas. 
That being said, I get full benefits with no (obvious) contribution, fill up the tank in the morning at the company's pumps, and I have my own "Personals / Private customers who call me in advance of need, which is something that Uber disallows but they could with slight mods to the app.
Uber doesn't allow personals but my company LOVES it and because of that I and a few other drivers on the same level get the choice of new vehicles when the company gets them.

In the long run, I pay for everything one way or the other when I deposit my trip envelope at the end of the day with their cash due at the end of my shift. 
I don't really have to show up on any given day, although my official days off are Mon. and Tues. but I worked yesterday because I had five Personals so I'm taking today off... and they don't call me to ask where I am and I don't have to call them. 
As long as I maintain a certain level of performance on a monthly basis, everything comes out in everybody's favor.... more or less. LOL. 
My checks/electronic deposits have never been late and there has never been a resulting hold on my account due to my company.

Like I said, I'm probably for all intents and purposes a glorified cab driver that wears a black suit and drives a new CTS, but my company has never said to me, "Now you get 25% instead of your 33% of the fare", plus I make incredible tips. I really do. 
My passengers love me, especially the regulars.... otherwise they wouldn't be regulars.... and I have about 1,100 of them that come into town maybe once or twice a year (and they refer their friends to me) or maybe every week.... and I take calls 24/7 to accommodate them, and that's something else that Uber forbids unless you fly "under the radar".

So who is the employee and who is the IC?


----------



## Old Rocker (Aug 20, 2015)

Uber-Doober said:


> ^^^
> I drive for a limo service but I look at is sort of a glorified taxi... and by the way, my company owns a few cab companies here in Vegas.
> That being said, I get full benefits with no (obvious) contribution, fill up the tank in the morning at the company's pumps, and I have my own "Personals / Private customers who call me in advance of need, which is something that Uber disallows but they could with slight mods to the app.
> Uber doesn't allow personals but my company LOVES it and because of that I and a few other drivers on the same level get the choice of new vehicles when the company gets them.
> ...


When I lived further west from where I do now, I'd take the two hour Southwest non-stop to Vegas once a month. I used the same town car driver as much as possible. It didn't cost much more than a cab, the car wasn't stuffed full of ads for escort services, and I arrived at my destination without feeling like I'd just kayaked down the Colorado River.


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

Old Rocker said:


> When I lived further west from where I do now, I'd take the two hour Southwest non-stop to Vegas once a month. I used the same town car driver as much as possible. It didn't cost much more than a cab, the car wasn't stuffed full of ads for escort services, and I arrived at my destination without feeling like I'd just kayaked down the Colorado River.


^^^
You're absolutely right. 
A lot of people don't realize that a TC or sedan doesn't cost much more (if any) than a cab especially during the rush hour.... and I say that due to the fact that at 5M a trip out to Summerlin in a cab can be astronomical, but in a sedan where you pay by the hour, hopefully that car can get out there without having to go into the "every 15 minute billing scenario". 
Plus, a sedan driver can "fudge" a little bit on the time sheet if he has a really good passenger/s or a Regular. 
I've never known my company to care about it much either way so if I run 10 minutes over, it falls more into the PR category than anything else. 
Especially if a passenger lives in an area of the valley that has a big black line around it on the driver's standard area map showing that it costs $5.00 more to pick up or deliver.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

GooberX said:


> No one is forcing you to live in this country either.


It doesn't need to be that confrontational.
It's more like, "if you don't like something, it's up to you do decide whether to leave it - or work to change it."
What I won't stand for is somebody telling me what I *should* or what I *must* do
just because they have an opinion that differes from mine...
with absolutely no understanding that everyone's circumstances, motivations and resources are unique.


----------



## SCdave (Jun 27, 2014)

Until there is a unified Federal definition of an OnDemand Independent Contractor and/or OnDemand Employee, how can we go forward? Maybe we go sideways and a bit backwards but how to go forward?

Starting point for me is that Uber cannot get both the benefit of having an Employee Like IC Driver workforce and controlling the Drivers much like they are Employees. State/Federal guidelines define what an OnDemand Worker is. It is put into Federal Law and the IRS lowers the boom when a Corporation or Company does not comply. This should not be rocket science.

Specifically to the TNC industry since this is currently the biggest use of OnDemand App Based Workforce would be as follows:

Uber has no say in either suggesting Tips are included, Tips are not necessary, or Tips are not required. For service based IC Work, the App is required to have an Tip Option.

Trip Fares default rates can be controlled by Uber. They are default rates that can change with TNC promotions. Drivers can negotiate with Riders for specific common sense reasons - long hauls, holidays, or ??? (fill in the blank). Make an upcharge within reason and make it transparent for Riders. It's doable.

All Trips must have a Pick Up Location AND Destination. Destination requires a complete address (verified reverse lookup by venue/bldg/business name) to get the standard or default Fare. Entering City Name Only is acceptable but there is an added fee. Entering nothing or "As Directed" has the highest surcharge.

The Driver is given the Pick Up Location AND Destination when the Trip Request comes in. Driver can accept or decline with no adverse affect on their status as drivers for the TNC / App Company. If App Technology company wants to facilitate this process with Drivers entering their Request Acceptance Parameters such as distance/time to Pick Up, maximum Trip Distance, direction to destination, platform, etc... then better.

There's more but basically if there are factors/parameters that directly have an effect on the IC Driver's Net Profit, either on the income or expense side, then there MUST be a means for the IC Driver to have control over Accepting the Fare or Not. No wiggle room here.

There is more but the starting point is defining what an OnDemand Worker is. Having laws that can be enforced quickly and decisively. You comply with these basic labor laws, you have a business, You don't, you have a website with a nice German sounding name.

Uber/Lyft and TNCs have now been around long enough for society (business, workers, and government) to create some Federal laws that "App Technology Companies" interested in taking advantage of the OnDemand Workforce must comply with. Not maybe, not kind of, but MUST.

Then Uber can continue with their current business model and offer "jobs" to all misclassified drivers. Or Uber can comply with Federal Law, change their business model and App as needed, and continue to "work" with Drivers as Independent Contractors.


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

SCdave said:


> Until there is a unified Federal definition of an OnDemand Independent Contractor and/or OnDemand Employee, how can we go forward? Maybe we go sideways and a bit backwards but how to go forward?
> 
> Starting point for me is that Uber cannot get both the benefit of having an Employee Like IC Driver workforce and controlling the Drivers much like they are Employees. State/Federal guidelines define what an OnDemand Worker is. It is put into Federal Law and the IRS lowers the boom when a Corporation or Company does not comply. This should not be rocket science.
> 
> ...


^^^
YES!
Definitely the best outline I've read so far.


----------



## AgentGG (Sep 25, 2015)

Uber drivers have less independence than ICs and have more risk than any employee, that makes them a whole new class of indentured workers that is much worse off. The main issue is that drivers carry the entire cost of vehicle use and are not compensated for their time, while being completely dependent on Uber for all market information and revenue. This leaves too much room for Uber to manipulate and screw drivers over, which they do left and right. Also, riders can screw drivers over in many ways and there is no way to know what happened. In this case, though I believe the pax, it is a he-says she-says case.


----------



## AgentGG (Sep 25, 2015)

Then Uber can continue with their current business model and offer "jobs" to all miss-classified drivers. Or Uber can comply with Federal Law, change their business model and App as needed, and continue to "work" with Drivers as Independent Contractors.[/QUOTE]

Good ideas but it will take another decade for the laws to catch up, by that time it will all be self-driving car-bots.

What I would add is that the taxi market is a public service providing transportation in any city. That increases economic infrastructure in a city. Therefore, there are reasons to make the entire supply-demand marketplace in a city public information that all taxi companies can share and access, and then compete for business in. As it is, Uber will have a serious monopoly on this information in many markets, so anti-trust issues may certainly arise. Again, technology is far ahead of the social, economic, and legal frameworks for such infrastructure. All really fundamental reasons why Uber in its current form will not be around very long.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

*Uber's response to BOLI's employee dispute
http://oregonbusinessreport.com/2015/10/ubers-response-to-bolis-employee-dispute/*


----------



## SCdave (Jun 27, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> *Uber's response to BOLI's employee dispute
> http://oregonbusinessreport.com/2015/10/ubers-response-to-bolis-employee-dispute/*


I spin because "I can". Uber I am.


----------



## Michael - Cleveland (Jan 1, 2015)

and here's a comment left on that website by an anonyous driver:

*An Uber 'Partner' Driver's Response to Uber's Letter to the Oregon BOLI*
22 October, 2015

Dear Commissioner Avakian,

As an Uber "partner" driver with over 3,000 trips completed over the past year, I can say with authority that William Barnes, Regional General Manager, West Uber, has misrepresented, and in many instances flat out lied, about Uber's relationship with Drivers.

*SCHEDULE OF WORK - FLEXIBILITY*
Mr. Barnes has grossly misrepresented worker's relationships with other employers by reducing employment descriptions to suit Uber's own agenda. The fact is that many employers offer workers positions which afford schedule flexibility and control over the hours and days worked. While Uber presents itself as having invented the 'flexible work' schedule, nothing could be further from the truth, as more and more workers opt to 'telecommute' to work, and work on the schedule and projects they choose, declining those they do not want to work.

*'BEING YOUR OWN BOSS'*
While 'Be Your Own Boss' is what Uber promises in their recruiting and marketing messages to Drivers, nothing could be further from the truth. The reality is that Uber exerts enormous, ever present control over what a driver can and cannot do - what kind of equipment (vehicle) they must use to perform the job, how that equipment must be maintained, how that equipment must be insured - and even what kind of state issued 'title' that equipment must have. Uber 'deactivates' drivers (fires them) when a driver attempts to exert the control an independent contractor would have in the performance of the work they do.

Mr. Barnes claims in his note that Uber 'partner' drivers are permitted to "simultaneously use competing platforms like Lyft to generate more rides", but this is a lie. I have received communication directly from Uber stating that while I can use a competing platform while NOT using the Uber platform, that I am specifically not permitted to use a competing platform while using the Uber platform. Mr. Barnes has outrageously mis-stated the control Uber exerts over drivers to make it appear that drivers have this flexibility - when in fact, we do not. Drivers who even discuss a competitive platform with riders who ask about those services have been deactivated (fired) and have lost access to the Uber platform. If that is not the action of an employer, then I don't know what is.

*RATINGS*
While Uber drivers are indeed 'rated' by Uber Riders, he fails to point out that those ratings from riders are more often than not based on the rider's impression of things that are wholly in the control of Uber, not the driver. These include pricing - and SURGE pricing, the distance a driver must travel to make a pick-up and the time it takes to reach a rider (which are obviously key factors in the rider experience).

Further, Ratings from Riders are not the only rating Uber tracks and reports to Drivers. All of the other measures of performance are derived from the data Uber collects and reported to the driver by Uber, including the driver's 'acceptance rate' and 'the driver's 'cancellation' rate.

And lastly, While Uber encourages and makes available to Riders a method for Riders to 'comment' on each and every Uber Ride, Uber selectively reports only a few of those comments to Drivers - and does so without informing the driver to which rider/trip the comment pertains. Combined, these systems of monitoring, reporting - and the emails implying deactivation of a driver for low ratings over which they have no control - result in a manipulation and overbearing control of Drivers who Uber claims are Independent Contractors.

*FARES*
In Uber's driver PARTNER AGREEMENT, Uber states that the fares charged are to be "negotiated" between the driver and the rider, and the fares published by Uber are only 'default' fares in the event a fare is not negotiated directly by the rider and the driver. This may be the biggest lie of all:

1. There is no MEANS by which a driver or Rider can affect a negotiated fare through either the Uber Partner Driver App or the Rider App.

2. Uber CSRs have confirmed to me upon my inquiry that if I negotiate a fare with a rider and ask Uber to implement that fare, that I will be deactivated.

3. Uber provides no means by which a rider can provide the driver any additional payment or gratuity (tip) through either the Uber Partner Driver App or the Uber Rider App.

Uber uses the language in its agreements to support their claim that Uber has no control over drivers or fares... but in practice, Uber exerts 100% control over the fares and the ability of Uber Partner Drivers and Uber Riders to negotiate anything about the fare or any gratuity.

Section 4 of the Uber Partner Agreement states in part:
_"...the parties acknowledge and agree that as between you and Company, the Fare is a recommended amount, and the primary purpose of the pre-arranged Fare is to act as the default amount in the event you do not negotiate a different amount. You shall always have the right to: (i) charge a fare that is less than the pre-arranged Fare; or (ii) negotiate, at your request, a Fare that is lower than the pre-arranged Fare (each of (i) and (ii) herein, a "Negotiated Fare"). Company shall consider all such requests from you in good faith."_​
In my experience over the last year, Uber has announced and implemented changes to their 'default' fares several times. Most of these changes have been a decrease in the amount Uber 'suggests' Rider's pay (and Driver's charge) for the 'base fare', mileage, and time of a trip. These decreases result in significant earnings decreases to drivers, who - in complete contradiction to the Uber Partner Agreement - do not have the ability to accept, reject or modify in any way the changes to the default fares. Uber's complete control over the fare a driver must charge a rider is another example of an employer that is exerting control over an employee.

If Uber is not my employer - and I am an Independent Contractor, how can Uber REQUIRE me to charge my riders a 'RIDER FEE' which Uber collects from the rider, charges to me and then deducts that same fee from me - and reports that fee on my 1099R as INCOME? I have no control over that fee - I do not get paid that fee, but Uber REQUIRES I charge that fee - and reports it to me and the IRS as Income. Why would Uber do that if it is not an attempt to 'mask' the fact that they are exerting control over an employee?

Most Sincerely,

An Uber Driver

(Forgive the anonymity: I fear deactivation from the Uber platform)


----------



## Uber-Doober (Dec 16, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> *Uber's response to BOLI's employee dispute
> http://oregonbusinessreport.com/2015/10/ubers-response-to-bolis-employee-dispute/*


^^^
Love how Barnes waxes poetic with the "ebbs and flows".


----------



## Bill Feit (Aug 1, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> *http://www.statesmanjournal.com/sto...rifies-uber-drivers-employee-status/73934988/*


Sure sounds like Oregon had Uber pegged!!! Thanks again Chi!


----------

