Joined
·
10,169 Posts
That's just to logical..Uber good business sense?? Nope!!Judge Chen questioned where there are differences in the contracts for Uber's right to control. " The language may be different but the outcome is the same," Chen said."
Uber's right to control . . . That says it all. U controls rates, what rating (too high) a driver must keep to be able to access the app among other things.
My opinion . . . If Uber would raise the rates for X drivers to a min of 1/2 the local taxi rates, and drop their percentage by 5%, it could still see a profit and less driver turnover.
Yea, suuuuuure! That "licensing agreement" contains too many infringements on a self-employed business.Michael - Cleveland said:"This isn't a contract of employment. This is a software licensing agreement," Boutrous said.
Ha ha the Donald! OMG!! It made me laugh as well.>>>Boutrous, though, claimed that you can't be viewing Uber's contracts as employment contracts to begin with.
"This isn't a contract of employment. This is a software licensing agreement," Boutrous said.<<<
That made me laugh almost as much as watching the GOP convention earlier this evening.
Ha ha ha! That's true. Trump would end up building a fence around your kids.most of those guys are pretty scary -
but at least I'd trust John Kasich to babysit my kids.
Hell, I did that 25 years ago.Ha ha ha! That's true. Trump would end up building a fence around your kids.
<------- One X driver over whom Uber does not have 100% control Nor will it!TwoFiddyMile said:Uber maintains 100% control over UberX drivers.
Let the delusions begin.<------- One X driver over whom Uber does not have 100% control Nor will it!
Anyone else care to raise their hands?
Excellent article that shoots down the "flexibility will be lost" theory.Good read:
Despite Uber's Arguments, Flexibility for Employees Is a Company's Choice
http://recode.net/2015/08/11/despite-ubers-arguments-flexibility-for-employees-is-a-companys-choice/