Uber are getting shirty
Discussion
http://www.cityam.com/252515/giving-uber-drivers-w...
Interesting question as to how working hours will be defined if the drivers get minimum wage. One of the drivers who complained he was getting less than minimum wage was turning down most of the runs he was offered. Will Uber still allow drivers to turn down jobs if they are getting paid regardless?
Interesting question as to how working hours will be defined if the drivers get minimum wage. One of the drivers who complained he was getting less than minimum wage was turning down most of the runs he was offered. Will Uber still allow drivers to turn down jobs if they are getting paid regardless?
JagLover said:
edh said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Who, other than HMRC and rival cab firms, is going to benefit from this ruling? It does seem like a massive extension of the notion of 'employment'.
The drivers? Plus an estimated half a million workers in other firms who have also been told they are "self employed"A higher minimum wage is required due to government policy mistakes in recent decades. Companies have been trying to get around this by classing people as self-employed who, in fact, are not based on their actual working arrangements.
RedTrident said:
Eric Mc said:
The differences that determine status can be very subtle.
There are literally dozens of cases on this topic, if you care to research the legal history.
The guys I know that switched to uber preferred it. No preferential treatment from the office, no need to bribe the radio guy for the better jobs etc. No way will they want to be employed and be paid an hourly rate. There are literally dozens of cases on this topic, if you care to research the legal history.
Although not a specific HMRC case, if you read HMRC's views on "employment v'self-employment", one of the first things they say is "employment status is not a matter of choice, it is a matter of fact".
In other words, what the parties involved in the arrangement would LIKE, is of no concern whatsoever.
PurpleMoonlight said:
Ta.
It has been reported the judgement deemed them workers, and it seems a worker is not necessarily an employee.
All very confusing.
The term "worker" is being used more and more. It seems to be some sort of "alternative universe" which is inhabited by people who are not employees nor self employed.It has been reported the judgement deemed them workers, and it seems a worker is not necessarily an employee.
All very confusing.
HMRC does not understand the word "worker" so they don't use this new but vague definition.
D
That the extra costs, holiday etc, will fall on the driver not on Uber. Also that although the drivers were held not to be self employed, they weren't held to be employees either. So not all the protections such as notice period that would apply to an employee would apply to Uber drivers.If thay were not getting minimum wage, but now will, where will the cost to the driver to cover holidays etc come from?Someone on the BBC news was saying they average about £12 per hour after their costs (more in London).
For them to get employee benefits their hourly rate will drop. There will probably be higher costs of employment as the will need to be HR, people etc to pay.
Liokault said:
Dr Jekyll said:
PurpleMoonlight said:
Dr Jekyll said:
What does that say? I can't get past the adblock.For them to get employee benefits their hourly rate will drop. There will probably be higher costs of employment as the will need to be HR, people etc to pay.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
No need for them to do so now - that whole system was only there because the drivers "weren't employed" by Uber, so they had to have choice, or at least the illusion of choice. I should think that one of the first changes they'll make is to make fares compulsory if you're nearby. They need to make the network more efficient since they have to pay for it now. I fully understand all the Uber hate.
What I don't understand is why TFL/Government is complicit in it.
I'm not against drivers making a living. However I am for market forces being given a chance to work. Uber does that. It breaks the monopoly and changes the status quo. Uber is, and should remain, a software company with a "travel broker" application that drivers and travellers choose to use or not as they see fit.
I can see why Uber, given the problems with regulatory bodies around the world, are researching driverless cars. Now that will put the cat amongst the pigeons....
What I don't understand is why TFL/Government is complicit in it.
I'm not against drivers making a living. However I am for market forces being given a chance to work. Uber does that. It breaks the monopoly and changes the status quo. Uber is, and should remain, a software company with a "travel broker" application that drivers and travellers choose to use or not as they see fit.
I can see why Uber, given the problems with regulatory bodies around the world, are researching driverless cars. Now that will put the cat amongst the pigeons....
Don said:
I can see why Uber, given the problems with regulatory bodies around the world, are researching driverless cars. Now that will put the cat amongst the pigeons....
Until recently I owned a good-sized private hire firm based in a very seriously 'challenging' area of Glasgow. I always chuckle when I think of the future driverless cars (probably an inevitability).Have you seen that Nicholas Cage film where he's an arms dealer (?) and in one scene he's sitting on a chair in a wilderness watching an unattended plane and the locals' "interaction" with it…
Don said:
I fully understand all the Uber hate.
I can see why Uber, given the problems with regulatory bodies around the world, are researching driverless cars. Now that will put the cat amongst the pigeons....
Hm, not sure about that. IMO that could well be their end. I can see why Uber, given the problems with regulatory bodies around the world, are researching driverless cars. Now that will put the cat amongst the pigeons....
There isn't much IP in the app, a very simple concept. With self driving cars they lose the advantage of having an established driver base. The future value is only user base / marketing. The major thing -- self driving car tech -- belongs to car manufacturers. They would find it easy to compete with uber if they wished to do so. And classic hire car companies might understand the business of shifting / running large fleets of cars better.
Asked the other way around -- why would one need uber once self driving car tech is a reality?
Eric Mc said:
The term "worker" is being used more and more. It seems to be some sort of "alternative universe" which is inhabited by people who are not employees nor self employed.
HMRC does not understand the word "worker" so they don't use this new but vague definition.
So they could be "worker" for some legislation - then HMRC can merrily carry on defining them as self employed or working under a contract for services ....(at the same time, in the same pair of trousers...)?HMRC does not understand the word "worker" so they don't use this new but vague definition.
If the drivers are now classed as employed who takes ownership of the vehicle (which is doubtless on lease and finance)? Will the drivers have to submit a monthly expenses form (insurance, fuel, maintenance, vehicle payments) etc? Are they supposed to now be earning a salary? How much is that salary? How is holiday pay going to be calculated? How is sick pay calculated bearing in mind the job doesn't require continuous attendance at an employer's office.
Someone hasn't thought this through.
Someone hasn't thought this through.
K12beano said:
Eric Mc said:
The term "worker" is being used more and more. It seems to be some sort of "alternative universe" which is inhabited by people who are not employees nor self employed.
HMRC does not understand the word "worker" so they don't use this new but vague definition.
So they could be "worker" for some legislation - then HMRC can merrily carry on defining them as self employed or working under a contract for services ....(at the same time, in the same pair of trousers...)?HMRC does not understand the word "worker" so they don't use this new but vague definition.
The definitions are not hard and fast.
audidoody said:
If the drivers are now classed as employed who takes ownership of the vehicle (which is doubtless on lease and finance)? Will the drivers have to submit a monthly expenses form (insurance, fuel, maintenance, vehicle payments) etc? Are they supposed to now be earning a salary? How much is that salary? How is holiday pay going to be calculated? How is sick pay calculated bearing in mind the job doesn't require continuous attendance at an employer's office.
Someone hasn't thought this through.
100% this. In short, who pays the diesel, and how?Someone hasn't thought this through.
Kolbenkopp said:
Don said:
I fully understand all the Uber hate.
I can see why Uber, given the problems with regulatory bodies around the world, are researching driverless cars. Now that will put the cat amongst the pigeons....
Hm, not sure about that. IMO that could well be their end. I can see why Uber, given the problems with regulatory bodies around the world, are researching driverless cars. Now that will put the cat amongst the pigeons....
There isn't much IP in the app, a very simple concept. With self driving cars they lose the advantage of having an established driver base. The future value is only user base / marketing. The major thing -- self driving car tech -- belongs to car manufacturers. They would find it easy to compete with uber if they wished to do so. And classic hire car companies might understand the business of shifting / running large fleets of cars better.
Asked the other way around -- why would one need uber once self driving car tech is a reality?
drainbrain said:
audidoody said:
If the drivers are now classed as employed who takes ownership of the vehicle (which is doubtless on lease and finance)? Will the drivers have to submit a monthly expenses form (insurance, fuel, maintenance, vehicle payments) etc? Are they supposed to now be earning a salary? How much is that salary? How is holiday pay going to be calculated? How is sick pay calculated bearing in mind the job doesn't require continuous attendance at an employer's office.
Someone hasn't thought this through.
100% this. In short, who pays the diesel, and how?Someone hasn't thought this through.
sugerbear said:
Fuel cards. Lots of fleets use them.
No, not HOW is the diesel paid for, WHO pays it? The company or the 'employee' ? And back to audidoody's more expansive question, is it the end for owner-drivers with responsibility for their own vehicles and their costs? Even the scale of diesel requirement is going to force Uber into wondering about diversifying into the fuel business. And the garage business? The insurance industry? Picture the future driverless uber owned car. Passenger's going to be sick. Everyday reality. One in a thousand. Of a million hires a day. From the first shout "I'm going to be sick!" to the cleaning up of the car, how do you see the process working.? (and this is one of many random situations that arise constantly everyday).
Right now it's pretty simple. Mostly the driver makes a fast stop the passenger pukes and the world moves on. So how's robo car going to deal with it?
(Dalek Voice): I'm ..going.. to.. puke…is…not…a…recognised….destination!! Please…enter…postcode!!!
Actually HOW does robocar use a fuel card? Or fill the tank come to that? Is it like a transformer that morphs into a roboman when it needs to?
Edited by drainbrain on Monday 31st October 12:14
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff