Uber Case Highlights Outdated Worker Protection Law Summary

1007 Words5 Pages

In the New York Times article entitled, “Uber Case Highlights Outdated Worker Protection Laws” Steven Davidoff Solomon analyzes a dispute in California concerning whether Uber drivers are employees or contractors. The California case began over the summer when three Uber drivers filed a lawsuit against the company. It was then set in motion recently this month when it was brought to a class-action lawsuit by a Boston based law firm. The case concerns Uber drivers in the state of California only, but nevertheless will effect Uber as a company overall. According to the article this is happening because Uber drivers are currently independent contractors and pay 20 percent of the fare to the company. As an independent contractor that means the drivers are not receiving benefits typical to an employer, such as health insurance. …show more content…

This may seem like an unfair arrangement, but benefits for drivers include schedule flexibility and the opportunity to be their own boss. Uber drivers not being considered employees was a way for the company itself to greatly benefit because they are not entitled to pay the expenses that go along with the title as an employer. This not only is what saves them money, but is also the basis of the company’s whole concept and what makes them huge threats to their taxicab competitors. One of Uber’s ambitions for their company was to have independent contractors as their drivers in order to create flexibility, differentiating the company from the typical taxi. It also makes costs for customers low and more affordable, which therefore attracts more business. Because of all this, it would be a huge issue for Uber if their drivers legally became employers because there will be less flexibility for their drivers potentially destroying the company’s unique system

More about Uber Case Highlights Outdated Worker Protection Law Summary