[Wayne01]

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=5890591d-6574-4ff7-afad-3e2a37d87830

This is a really great summation.
I have never seen an article on this matter so precise.

 

[Scottie B]

Uber driver is a sub contractor and always will be

 

[Wayne01]

Uber driver is a sub contractor and always will be

You have to admit that this is well written though. Very clear.

 

[KoleosG]

Same like taxi driver

 

[Jules66]

Yes its clear but it is only telling one side of the story. I would suspect it is written by Uber. Didn't the guy defend himself against a round table of lawyers? The key point is that uber do not allow you to see the destination or information about the passanger, and uber dishes out work in a way it sees fit which gives them all the aces. Taxis of old are no comparison as they were working in a government regulated industry.

 

[BuckleUp]

It makes sense. No different to AirBNB and a thousand others. These companies just provide a technology platform to connect buyer and seller. Now it's mobile phones, 20 years ago it was the Yellow Pages. You can't bring an unfair dismissal against the Yellow Pages because they don't want to run your ad because customers called to complain about you. Unfortunately this is the way technology and work are developing. We are all expendable, no matter the industry - uber, fiverr, upwork, airbnb, facebook businesses, whatever.

 

[mistareno]

It makes sense. No different to AirBNB and a thousand others. These companies just provide a technology platform to connect buyer and seller. Now it's mobile phones, 20 years ago it was the Yellow Pages. You can't bring an unfair dismissal against the Yellow Pages because they don't want to run your ad because customers called to complain about you. Unfortunately this is the way technology and work are developing. We are all expendable, no matter the industry - uber, fiverr, upwork, airbnb, facebook businesses, whatever.

I think the main difference is that Uber don't give you all the information required to make an informed decision whether the job suits your business needs.

It's akin to a builder getting a construction job 200km away, and not knowing if they are building a mail box or a Deck until they arrive at the house with their truck and tools.

Sure, building a Deck for 20hrs at $100/hr might make the trip(s) worthwhile, but a 1hr mailbox will cost you money.

No other business I know of sub-contracts 'mystery jobs' to their 'contractors'.

The only workers I know that are expected to do a job regardless of its profitability are employees of a company.

No private contractor would ever take on a job that would potentially cost them money, or take on a job that required expenditure without knowing what the job entails.

That Uber expects its drivers to do so 50 times a day, should raise alarm bells that Uber is not acting as a simple Technology Provider. If it was, it wouldn't need to stack the deck in its favor to ensure 'its' customers are served.

Strangely, the commission report makes no mention of the issue.

Instead, this is what was in the report...

In making his finding, DP Gostencnik applied the established test for identifying an employment relationship, considering:

Control - and finding Mr Kaseris had complete control in providing services, deciding himself when to log into the Uber app and when to accept and reject rides (but conceding that Uber's imposition of service standards and pricing parameters did limit Mr Kaseris' control to a point).

How anyone (especially someone supposedly acting impartially) can conclude that an Uber driver has 'complete control' in providing a service is laughable, when Uber makes the driver commit to an expenditure without telling them what service they are going to be providing...

 

[χ²(1)]

Here's a link to the transcript of the decision (on the Fair Work website)

http://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/html/2017fwc6610.htm
http://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/awardsandorders/html/pr598990.htm

How anyone (especially someone supposedly acting impartially) can conclude that an Uber driver has 'complete control' in providing a service is laughable

If you read the decision on the Fair Work website, examples of 'control' are given, which presumably informed the judge's decision.

Here's an excerpt:

The Respondent [Uber] submits that it is evident from the above extracts that the wages-work bargain which is essential to an employment relationship is missing. The Respondent does not owe any legal obligation to the Applicant [Mr. Michail Kaseris] except to provide access to the Partner App and remittance of the fares and cancellation fees that the Rider pays to the Driver. None of this was seriously challenged by the Applicant. The Respondent contends that on this point alone, the Applicant's application fails. I agree. It is, I consider, in this case clear on the facts that these fundamental elements of an employment relationship did not exist as between the Applicant and the Respondent. I briefly restate the uncontested evidence set out earlier to make good this conclusion.

First, neither under the terms of the Services Agreement between the parties nor under the arrangement as it operated in practice was the Applicant required to perform any work or provide any services for the benefit of the Respondent. As the evidence plainly establishes, the Applicant was free to perform as much or as little work with it as he liked. In providing a transportation service to riders, the Applicant did so when, where and for whom he saw fit, without any further reference to the Respondent. In the provision of the transportation service to a Rider, the Applicant was not performing any contractual obligation he owed to the Respondent.

Secondly, the Respondent did not make any payment to the Applicant for the provision of any work or services. Rather, the Applicant was charged a service fee by the Respondent calculated as an agreed percentage of the fee paid by the Rider for the trip in consideration for certain services provided by the Respondent to the Applicant to which reference has earlier been made. The work-wages bargain is plainly absent. There was no employment relationship between the Applicant and the Respondent with the consequence that the Applicant was not an employee and was thus not a person protected from unfair dismissal.

The judge can only weigh the evidence in front of them. Clearly, Mr. Michail Kaseris's evidence was lacking.

 

[5STARS@Sydney]

I think the main difference is that Uber don't give you all the information required to make an informed decision whether the job suits your business needs.

It's akin to a builder getting a construction job 200km away, and not knowing if they are building a mail box or a Deck until they arrive at the house with their truck and tools.

Sure, building a Deck for 20hrs at $100/hr might make the trip(s) worthwhile, but a 1hr mailbox will cost you money.

No other business I know of sub-contracts 'mystery jobs' to their 'contractors'.

The only workers I know that are expected to do a job regardless of its profitability are employees of a company.

No private contractor would ever take on a job that would potentially cost them money, or take on a job that required expenditure without knowing what the job entails.

That Uber expects its drivers to do so 50 times a day, should raise alarm bells that Uber is not acting as a simple Technology Provider. If it was, it wouldn't need to stack the deck in its favor to ensure 'its' customers are served.

Strangely, the commission report makes no mention of the issue.

Instead, this is what was in the report...

In making his finding, DP Gostencnik applied the established test for identifying an employment relationship, considering:

Control - and finding Mr Kaseris had complete control in providing services, deciding himself when to log into the Uber app and when to accept and reject rides (but conceding that Uber's imposition of service standards and pricing parameters did limit Mr Kaseris' control to a point).

How anyone (especially someone supposedly acting impartially) can conclude that an Uber driver has 'complete control' in providing a service is laughable, when Uber makes the driver commit to an expenditure without telling them what service they are going to be providing...

When you get a ping, Uber doesn't hold a gun to your head and make you accept it. It tells you how far it is and you have a choice to accept or not. Even after you accept the ping you can ring pax and ask how far they are going and if you don't like their answer you can cancel request and move on.

Base rate ants are usually the ones complaining about rates and conditions. They should just find a job flipping burgers where they have set hours and pay.

 

[NeilWhite]

It's rubbish, total spin.
Uber sets the price not us.
SHOW US THE DESTINATION, than you are welcome to call us contractors. Right now we are aren't even employees, we are Sara's Slaves!!!

 

[UberDriverAU]

Same like taxi driver

No. A taxi driver is not a contractor. They're either an owner driver or bailee driver. That's a different concept to employee/contractor.

It makes sense. No different to AirBNB and a thousand others.

Not really. AirBNB doesn't set prices and conditions, hosts do. Uber has sole control of prices and significant control of conditions.

When you get a ping, Uber doesn't hold a gun to your head and make you accept it.

If you're a genuine casual employee and your employer calls you to offer a shift, they don't hold a gun to your head and force you to accept it.

 

[Duderx]

"If you're a genuine casual employee and your employer calls you to offer a shift, they don't hold a gun to your head and force you to accept it."

But they might stop offering shifts if you decline too many offers - oh hang on, that's what Uber does......

 

[Seiko Obsession]

It makes sense. No different to AirBNB and a thousand others. These companies just provide a technology platform to connect buyer and seller. Now it's mobile phones, 20 years ago it was the Yellow Pages. You can't bring an unfair dismissal against the Yellow Pages because they don't want to run your ad because customers called to complain about you. Unfortunately this is the way technology and work are developing. We are all expendable, no matter the industry - uber, fiverr, upwork, airbnb, facebook businesses, whatever.

Rubbish,if we are independent contractors than we would have more control on main factors of platform,see destination,set up prices exc.
Uber has lot of control over us.

 

[5STARS@Sydney]

Rubbish,if we are independent contractors than we would have more control on main factors of platform,see destination,set up prices exc.
Uber has lot of control over us.

Well when you have your own ride-sharing app you can use that instead of using Uber. Then you can set the rates and other conditions as you see fit. We pay Uber a portion of our fare as commission for the use of THEIR app.

Do let us know when your ride-share app is up and running. I'd be keen to ditch Uber and move across to yours.

 

[BuckleUp]

Rubbish,if we are independent contractors than we would have more control on main factors of platform,see destination,set up prices exc.
Uber has lot of control over us.

I agree it would be good to have the destination, but then many riders would be left standing on the street. Had this problem massively in Bangkok during peak hours, my house was an hour drive out and no taxi wanted to go there - they make their cash on flagfall whizzing around Bangkok. As an example, a ride out on the elevated expressway to my place from Sukhumvit Rd was 220 baht ($10), a flagfall was 40 baht. They make 5 flagfalls in an hour (200) plus another 150 baht running around the city vs an hour trip for 220 one way. Same thing will happen here, riders will be left standing and pissed off when ubers don't pick them up. As soon as a competitor shows up, like today, they will switch over.

 

[UberDriverAU]

"If you're a genuine casual employee and your employer calls you to offer a shift, they don't hold a gun to your head and force you to accept it."

But they might stop offering shifts if you decline too many offers - oh hang on, that's what Uber does......

So it's useless as a test to discriminate between a casual employee and contractor, isn't it?

I agree it would be good to have the destination, but then many riders would be left standing on the street. Had this problem massively in Bangkok during peak hours, my house was an hour drive out and no taxi wanted to go there - they make their cash on flagfall whizzing around Bangkok. As an example, a ride out on the elevated expressway to my place from Sukhumvit Rd was 220 baht ($10), a flagfall was 40 baht. They make 5 flagfalls in an hour (200) plus another 150 baht running around the city vs an hour trip for 220 one way. Same thing will happen here, riders will be left standing and pissed off when ubers don't pick them up. As soon as a competitor shows up, like today, they will switch over.

So Uber doesn't reveal the destination so they can control driver behaviour, correct?

 

[Seiko Obsession]

I agree it would be good to have the destination, but then many riders would be left standing on the street. Had this problem massively in Bangkok during peak hours, my house was an hour drive out and no taxi wanted to go there - they make their cash on flagfall whizzing around Bangkok. As an example, a ride out on the elevated expressway to my place from Sukhumvit Rd was 220 baht ($10), a flagfall was 40 baht. They make 5 flagfalls in an hour (200) plus another 150 baht running around the city vs an hour trip for 220 one way. Same thing will happen here, riders will be left standing and pissed off when ubers don't pick them up. As soon as a competitor shows up, like today, they will switch over.

Drivers wouldn't pick them up if they rating went low anyways at least I don't.
Short trip *1 regadaless.
They just lift min Fare to $10 and sort out issue of short fares

 

[Tiktak]

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=5890591d-6574-4ff7-afad-3e2a37d87830

This is a really great summation.
I have never seen an article on this matter so precise.

I don't know many would want to work for Uber as an employee. I wouldn't.

I love the flexibility and freedom.

Well when you have your own ride-sharing app you can use that instead of using Uber. Then you can set the rates and other conditions as you see fit. We pay Uber a portion of our fare as commission for the use of THEIR app.

Do let us know when your ride-share app is up and running. I'd be keen to ditch Uber and move across to yours.

Classic. Lol

 

[BuckleUp]

I don't know many would want to work for Uber as an employee. I wouldn't.

I love the flexibility and freedom.

Classic. Lol

A rideshare app is almost as easy to setup as a website. A little more tech knowhow, but not that much. The hard part is the marketing and backend infrastructure, getting riders and drivers on board.
You can set this thing up for after hours doctors (many using it already), vets, restaurants, Australia Post, couriers, even your kids and mother-in-law, even all your facebook friends, pretty much anything. I think by year end you can download and setup yourself on a hosted solution, use it for whatever business you want. The way tech is moving and disrupting industries is amazing.