News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Uber loses court appeal against drivers' rights. Parent comment

Re:Uber loses court appeal against drivers' rights by dx034 on Friday November 10, 2017 @11:11AM (#15670834)
A lot of Europeans (including me) are of the opinion that a job without protection (minimum wage, sick pay, health insurance, unemployment insurance/benefits, cover for accidents) shouldn't exist. Someone should rather be unemployed and receive benefits while looking for employment or while retraining than being exploited by a company. Not saying that this is the case with all Uber drivers but there's a decent amount of people who work hours that would be illegal in any employment while earning just enough to survive. The reasons why people still accept these jobs are diverse but Uber's promises of good wages (>£10/hr) played a role getting many to drive. And once you have your car and license you need to drive to pay off loans.

Being self employed can have its benefits but Uber drivers enjoy very few of those.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber loses court appeal against drivers' rights by pm90 on Friday November 10, 2017 @11:29AM (#15670968)
I think a lot of Americans have a different view of how labor and markets should work. Especially on this forum, which is very much pro-laissez faire capitalism (I see a lot of Randian themes being repeated).

Labor can be exploited only when a corporation can sidestep the organized labor pool and tap into the pool of labor that demands no protections. If most Americans thought as you did, I don't think American corporations could get away with paying their employees such pitiful wages and benefits.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber loses court appeal against drivers' rights by Joky on Friday November 10, 2017 @12:06PM (#15671239)
This is forgetting that most craftsmanship small shops or other individual profession are self-employed and don't have minimum wage, maximum hours, unemployment benefits, etc. Think about bakers, nurses (outside of clinics/hospital), etc. It is not clear why "taxi drivers" shouldn't be allowed for people to be self-employed and managed their time themselves.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber loses court appeal against drivers' rights by dx034 on Thursday November 16, 2017 @04:39AM (#15711367)
Because truly self employed people can decide who they work for and how they structure their business. With Uber, you're very restricted in how you're set up (rules on cars) and who you work for (forced to accept jobs). Taxi drivers can be self employed and have been for a long time in most countries but Uber has more power over the drivers than is usual for self employed people.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber loses court appeal against drivers' rights by Joky on Thursday November 16, 2017 @05:13AM (#15711510)
I was addressing the part of your comment that mentioned "a job without protection (minimum wage, sick pay, health insurance, unemployment insurance/benefits, cover for accidents) shouldn't exist".
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Uber loses court appeal against drivers' rights by SilasX on Friday November 10, 2017 @04:23PM (#15673168)
I don't think Europeans consistently adhere to that, since they allow small business proprietors and (legit) contractors to work for low effective wages. To the extent that such workers receive benefits, they're paid directly by the state rather than, "Hey client/customer, you need to stop exploiting that contractor/business; give them some health insurance!"
[ Parent | on HN ]