Uber Drivers Forum banner
  • If you have joined UberPeople.net because your Uber account was hacked, you've likely been taken in by a scam. Please read this before starting a thread on this subject.

California Labor Board not doing it's job

766 Views 17 Replies 11 Participants Last post by  here2der
It's now been nearly a year since the California Supreme Court Ruled in the Dynamex case that be they were making new and more simple rules that employers must follow if they want to classifying their worker's as Independent Contractor's.
The Court said as of 04/30/2018 that all workers in California are employees and that if an employer wants to change their employees to independent contractor's the employer must be able to prove that they can pass the ABC Test.
If they can pass this test, then they can change their employees into independent contractor's
So on 5/1/2018 all Driver's that work for Uber, Lyft, and any other Gig economy worker should have been changed to employees.
But as we all know as of right now all these workers are still being treated as Contractor's.
This all being said, my question is why hasn't the California Labor Commissioner cracked down on all these companies that have just ignored California law? It blows my mind that Uber and Lyft can time after time ignore the law and after more than 5 years, they are still getting away with cheating thousands of worker's.
So if you're like me who tried working for these clowns or still do, and you're mad because you have been screwed in order for these Gig scammer to use you to pay their expenses so that they can be millionaires, while you have to sleep in your car because even with 50 hr plus work weeks, after expenses you can't afford an apartment, then do something about it. Contact the California Labor Commissioner's office near you and ask them why, after the California Supreme Court ruled that all workers are employees until the employer can prove they can pass the ABC test, are Uber and Lyft not complying with the law? And why after a year has gone by, you haven't done anything to make them comply? If at least a few hundred of us did this I think you would soon start seeing expense reimbursement checks showing up in your bank accounts soon. For me that amounts to over $26,000 Lyft owes me. But not for long I have already accessed the Labor Commission to get my money back. It's just a matter of a few more months and with penalties I will be $50k richer and so can you. But only if you make Uber and Lyft obey the law.
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 1
1 - 2 of 18 Posts
They do not control how you work, when you work, who you choose to take or kick out of your car.
You've gotta be kidding.

"High" cancellation rates have gotten many drivers terminated. Uber used to terminate for "low" acceptance rates.

Every kick out is a potential termination.

By showing only one destination for stacked (multiple orders from same restaurant) Eats orders, Uber micromanages (controls) the delivery process, a big no no when dealing with a supposed IC.
Uber is NOT a transportation business. They are a tech business. They make money by you using their tech. You pay them for using their tech to match YOU with customers and processing payments.
Uber says 2+2 = 5. The fact that our govt has allowed uber to get away with making that claim doesn't change the fact that their claim is false.
Most ants can't wrap their heads around the fact that they are AGREEING to the terms they hate so much
"Agreeing" to terms does not necessarily mean someone likes the terms, especially when the alternative to "agreeing" to them is losing your job.
You, as an IC are free to take all/some/none of the ride REQUESTS that uber offers you.
Being an IC didn't prevent uber from threatening drivers with termination for low acceptance rates. Uber didn't change that policy until 2016, and even then they only did it to appease a judge in California.
So why would a tech company, that makes money by SELLING ITS SERVICES TO DRIVERS want to keep drivers that would simply decline the request? No one would want an unreliable sub-contractor on there list.
Now you're contradicting yourself and uber.

A company wouldn't want to keep them, but that's the price they pay for paying their drivers garbage pay rates. It's also the price they pay for choosing not to put drivers on the payroll as employees. Uber saves billions of dollars a year in Minimum Wage, FICA, Comp, and unemployment by classifying their drivers as ICs.

If uber really wants reliably available drivers, PAY THEM WELL or put them on the PAYROLL as employees. They demand having their cake and eating it too, but that's not the way it works.
So why would a tech company, that makes money by SELLING ITS SERVICES TO DRIVERS
If they're not a transportation company, then 2+2 = 5
The fact that they are deactivating you (NOT FIRING YOU
In their literature, the IRS uses the term "fired" for ICs whose contracts have been terminated by their companies. If it's good enough for the IRS, it's good enough for me.
See less See more
1 - 2 of 18 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.