It's a 3 way relationship between driver, passenger with Uber facilitating that relationship. Uber owns the passengers and they offer drivers the ability to fulfill the potential-passengers.
Maybe this would be clearer if Uber offered an API for the driver side so they wouldn't be forced to use the app and thus muddy the relationship.
I can’t completely tell whether you are agreeing with me or not, but I think that example reinforces that Uber drivers are exploited employees with the benefit of a flexible schedule.
I was coming at it from the point of view of the customer.
Negotiating a sale price is not exclusive to independent agents. Some stores and indeed some chains will allow their employees(supervisor/manager) to accept a lower price. That is not exclusive to or indicative of an independent contractor.
Someone who drives for Uber has the agency to turn down work that Uber puts in front of them with 0 reason needed to be given (either to customer or Uber).
Related, if a software contracting firm says: 'hey, there's a gig that pays $x an hour, no negotiations - do you want it?'
I don't suddenly become an employee of the firm I'm contracting for just because I didn't get a chance to negotiate the price. I had agency to accept or decline the contract.
If I'm going for a job as an employee and negotiate my salary, they don't suddenly mark me down as a contractor.
> Related, if a software contracting firm says: 'hey, there's a gig that pays $x an hour, no negotiations - do you want it?'
That's not what is happening here. The driver and the rider are not forming a carriage contract. Uber is forming a contract with the rider, and employing drivers to fulfill those contracts. Even with the concessions Uber has offered, they are still using their platform power to control activity via incentives, and whatever games they play with the algorithm once the heat is off. At the end of the day, as long as the labor pool remains unorganized, Uber still retains pricing power.
None of these drivers own the customer relationship (again, they are not forming a contract with the riders). That means that (without violating the TOS) these drivers are not holding any equity in the business. In your proposed scenario, if you accept the software contract and do good work, there is a likelihood of more work at higher rates, and increased business through word of mouth. With no opportunity to build wealth, I can't imagine how rideshare drivers would be considered independent.
It's fine to look at the problem from a customer-centric viewpoint, and I realize that doing so has been a fairly orthodox economic strategy for the past 50 years, but that doesn't make it correct or good. None of the ride share companies seem to be able to turn a profit, even with a questionable model built on exploiting labor laws, yet they had $200M to pass Prop22. That kind of strategy only makes sense if your goal is to gain a monopoly position, and it is right to oppose these companies in doing so. Devaluing labor maybe optimal for some individuals, but it's bad for labor as a whole, which is exactly why we pass law that raise the floor.
1. Yes, in California only, effective in July of this year. I.E. regulation having an intended effect, increasing worker power.
2. The contract is still between the rideshare company the rider, not between the driver and the rider. An actual IC relationship would give the rider and driver the ability to opt-in to a provider-customer relationship and easily create future contracts with each other. Uber's model (monopoly power) necessitates their involvement, which is basically the source of conflict here. Their model is incompatible with giving the drivers actual independence.
There are many others, but these two are the most egregious.
Obviously some of us net positive into the government. That's how society works.
Her husband and Uber are gaming the system to avoid that responsibility.
We do pay into unemployment, as we are both salaried workers of our own business.
He did not take unemployment during Covid. Our stores were considered essential, so they stayed open.
That is pretty much the point of part-time driving. You have a full-time job or business that pays the bills and you just want some extra cash.
The extra cash from Uber enabled him to pay off his car quickly and continues to provide extra money for our family. It is not a full-time income, nor do we ever expect it to be.
This is our situation, and I understand that others are different. However, you specifically asked about him, so I replied with our details.