Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received a large tip

Re:Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received... by lenticular on Tuesday January 29, 2019 @05:23PM (#19030429)

Not sure why this is being downvoted, as you absolutely are not wrong about this. They are independent contractors who entered into a contract just like a restaurant could contract with a food supplier. They aren't employees in the least as far as the law is concerned.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received... by FireBeyond on Tuesday January 29, 2019 @07:26PM (#19031388)

Because Washington state is a little more rigorous than "did you enter into a contract? nope, not an employee!" than you describe.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received... by nerpderp83 on Tuesday January 29, 2019 @09:31PM (#19032099)

How and why are you so vehemently defending instacart when it comes to WA state law?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received... by lenticular on Wednesday January 30, 2019 @09:55AM (#19035472)

I'm not defending Instacart, I'm just pointing out legal realities. Many folks in this thread are severely mistaken about employment law. Just because something is morally wrong doesn't mean its illegal. I'm from Washington as well. I know a decent amount about employment law here.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received... by icebraining on Wednesday January 30, 2019 @05:36AM (#19034041)

Is lenticular defending Instacart? It helps no one - much less the victims - to inaccurately portray their legal situation.

[ Parent | on HN ]