| Uber lose court case 09:59 - Feb 19 with 1930 views | wood_hoop |
Not got Uber where i live so never use them but glad a tech company getting a kick up the arse, now for the rest.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/bus |  | | |  |
| Uber lose court case on 12:34 - Feb 19 with 1768 views | Nov77 |
Their whole business model is basically getting people to work for low pay (undercutting competitors), lumping all of the expenses onto them, and then stealing twenty five percent of their earnings (and then not paying any tax or VAT). [Post edited 19 Feb 2021 12:34]
|  |
| |
| Uber lose court case on 13:19 - Feb 19 with 1696 views | 2Thomas2Bowles |
Hopefully it's the end of them in the UK. |  |
| |
| Uber lose court case on 13:58 - Feb 19 with 1635 views | danehoop |
| Uber lose court case on 12:34 - Feb 19 by Nov77 |
Their whole business model is basically getting people to work for low pay (undercutting competitors), lumping all of the expenses onto them, and then stealing twenty five percent of their earnings (and then not paying any tax or VAT). [Post edited 19 Feb 2021 12:34]
|
Absolutely agree. Essentially tax dodging exploitation who have relied on friends in high places to protect them.
Suspicion at this point is that an attempt will be made to simply change the law so it can continue, pretty much repeating what happened in California. If you look at who their friends are in government its certainly one to watch. |  |
| Never knowingly understood |
| |
| Uber lose court case on 14:00 - Feb 19 with 1628 views | Watford_Ranger |
I appreciate there are huge flaws to their model and very good reasons morally not to use them.
But, purely as a consumer looking for the best value, they’re really handy. |  | | |
| Uber lose court case on 14:09 - Feb 19 with 1581 views | 2Thomas2Bowles |
| Uber lose court case on 14:00 - Feb 19 by Watford_Ranger |
I appreciate there are huge flaws to their model and very good reasons morally not to use them.
But, purely as a consumer looking for the best value, they’re really handy. |
I only buy from China or Bangladesh some other 3 world country.
Price first every time, never mind the morals... | |
| |
| Uber lose court case on 14:24 - Feb 19 with 1565 views | Match82 |
| Uber lose court case on 14:09 - Feb 19 by 2Thomas2Bowles |
I only buy from China or Bangladesh some other 3 world country.
Price first every time, never mind the morals... |
Speaking about the US here and Chicago specifically, but it's not just price. For years, the majority of taxi drivers here have been rude, obnoxious, terrible drivers. More often than not they are talking on the phone for the entire journey and I've even had one start smoking. Would I rather give my money to them, or to someone trying to make a few extra bucks on the side to help their family get by? No question in my mind. Just a shame that Uber take such a chunk of what they actually deserve.
My experience outside Chicago has been that taxi drivers are much better, especially the London cabbies |  | | |
| Uber lose court case on 14:28 - Feb 19 with 1536 views | Jigsore |
Great news |  | | |
| Uber lose court case on 14:51 - Feb 19 with 1486 views | SimplyNico |
| Uber lose court case on 13:58 - Feb 19 by danehoop |
Absolutely agree. Essentially tax dodging exploitation who have relied on friends in high places to protect them.
Suspicion at this point is that an attempt will be made to simply change the law so it can continue, pretty much repeating what happened in California. If you look at who their friends are in government its certainly one to watch. |
No. Not likely at all. It would require a wholesale reform of English employment law as to who is an employee, a work or an independent contractor in business on their own account. It is the latest in growing list of cases in the gig economy which has gone against the company. The Supreme Court were clear about what the mischief being protected against is here: exploitation of workers. Uber will get by through diversifying their business model with new service offerings to replace the profit they will lose here. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Uber lose court case on 18:52 - Feb 19 with 1326 views | derbyhoop |
having worked freelance in another industry I know there are wide boys who try to exploit their workers (employees and contractors). i was lucky enough to have skills which were comparitively rare, so demand outstripped supply. |  |
| "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one's lifetime." (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop and now on Bluesky |
| |
| Uber lose court case on 00:17 - Feb 20 with 1217 views | danehoop |
| Uber lose court case on 14:51 - Feb 19 by SimplyNico |
No. Not likely at all. It would require a wholesale reform of English employment law as to who is an employee, a work or an independent contractor in business on their own account. It is the latest in growing list of cases in the gig economy which has gone against the company. The Supreme Court were clear about what the mischief being protected against is here: exploitation of workers. Uber will get by through diversifying their business model with new service offerings to replace the profit they will lose here. |
I agree that it would require the wholesale reform of English employment law.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/bus
I would love to share your optimism that it wont happen, but suspect this is just delayed not stopped. | |
| Never knowingly understood |
| |
| Uber lose court case on 00:44 - Feb 20 with 1192 views | CiderwithRsie |
| Uber lose court case on 14:00 - Feb 19 by Watford_Ranger |
I appreciate there are huge flaws to their model and very good reasons morally not to use them.
But, purely as a consumer looking for the best value, they’re really handy. |
Well, yeah, but anybody can give best value if you cut out the costs of tax and basic employee benefits while everybody else has to pay them.
The shame is that, as with Amazon, there is actually a really good consumer service lurking in there. Amazon made its name on cheap books but actually bookshops have done OK by concentrating on "experience"; the reason Amazon's king is that you can buy almost anything from them (just like supermarkets destroyed traditional butchers, greengrocers etc) from your home any time of day. It's a great idea and Bezos deserves to be rich from it.
Uber's ease of ordering a cab to where you need it from your mobile is genuinely a better service than wandering around hoping to find a black cab or ringing a load of dodgy minicab firms. It ought to be a money-spinner, but as with Amazon that's not enough for them, they also want to screw the drivers and the taxpayer so they can inflate their profits and wipe out the competition. It needs to be stamped on. | | | |
| Uber lose court case on 01:00 - Feb 20 with 1195 views | CroydonCaptJack |
The business model is to effectively achieve a monopoly then they will start increasing prices.
I expect the same from Spotify. I cant see how these companies can be getting their finance for these losses unless that is the case. |  |
| |
| Uber lose court case on 04:39 - Feb 20 with 1161 views | PlanetHonneywood |
This is a fantastic result from the SC and a real ripple effect for workers in the gig economy. I’m sure the rationale behind the decision is being eagerly read and just as judiciary jumped on the ‘50-week’ contract in the 90s, this decision shows that the judiciary still plays a pivotal role in providing ‘checks and balances’!
Two things to add:
1. This result came about as a result of the drivers having a union to represent them. For those who criticise TUs, this and many results of this nature only come about because of organised representation. Something millions of workers around the world are denied and killed over.
2.You know, you can always leave an Uber driver a good tip! If memory serves , they have to pay approximately 20% of the fare to Uber. Next time you pay, remember that and tip accordingly. |  |
| |
| Uber lose court case on 07:37 - Feb 20 with 1098 views | SimplyNico |
| Uber lose court case on 00:17 - Feb 20 by danehoop |
I agree that it would require the wholesale reform of English employment law.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/bus
I would love to share your optimism that it wont happen, but suspect this is just delayed not stopped. |
The issue in play was the status of the individuals, that is whether they were employees, workers or self-employed in business on their own account independent contractors. I didn't say it would require a wholesale reform of English employment law; I limited my comment to that issue of status.
The fact is that reforms of employment law generally happen all the time (about 15 years ago, I wrote a very dull, nearly 500 page book, on the issue of trade union rights, the first 50 or so pages of which focused on the different eras of employment law in England and Wales; the royalties have amonted to about the value of a season ticket each year, which shows how little it has been read). Reform of employment law happens all the time; it is a tool of political policy. Reform of the issue of status, going right the way back to the law of master and servant, does not happen.
Employment rights are based on the issue of status.
Going back to Uber (and all the other gig companies), they argue the law is out of synch with them; the fact is, they are out of synch with the law in this country. | | | |
| Uber lose court case on 08:46 - Feb 20 with 1054 views | Hunterhoop |
| Uber lose court case on 00:44 - Feb 20 by CiderwithRsie |
Well, yeah, but anybody can give best value if you cut out the costs of tax and basic employee benefits while everybody else has to pay them.
The shame is that, as with Amazon, there is actually a really good consumer service lurking in there. Amazon made its name on cheap books but actually bookshops have done OK by concentrating on "experience"; the reason Amazon's king is that you can buy almost anything from them (just like supermarkets destroyed traditional butchers, greengrocers etc) from your home any time of day. It's a great idea and Bezos deserves to be rich from it.
Uber's ease of ordering a cab to where you need it from your mobile is genuinely a better service than wandering around hoping to find a black cab or ringing a load of dodgy minicab firms. It ought to be a money-spinner, but as with Amazon that's not enough for them, they also want to screw the drivers and the taxpayer so they can inflate their profits and wipe out the competition. It needs to be stamped on. |
Just because it’s a real bugbear of mine, Cider: Bezos does not deserve to be rich because of the idea; he deserves to be rich for executing his idea so well, especially from broadly a standing start.
I hate this culture that an idea is what it’s all about. As Steve Jobs said, the idea is the easy part; it’s 10% of the work. The other 90% is all the incredibly hard work and problems solved to turn the idea into something real... that works. Great ideas don’t just magically become reality.
It’s why I detest all this talk in the media about rich celebrities who diversify into fashion, fragrances, etc. It’s not hard for them to have ideas of what they like style wise. It’s hard to design the items, source the materials, manage the shipment of goods, recruit, hire and manage all the people that work on the project, hard to execute the marketing well, run the retail channels, do the accounting, manage the supply chain, etc, etc, etc, none of which the celebrity does. They just hire one person to set up the company/infrastructure and hire a team, and then that group deliver everything. Or worse they are just a face on a PE backed project. And they can afford to do that because they are already super wealthy from previous activity. Capital breads capital; ideas do not.
The difference with Bezos is he at least led all of those tasks, as opposed to a Jenner, for example. And had to do it all within the constraints of a normal business/financial environment. He is an exception because he built a business up without vast capital, operating under normal constraints that operates within the law (just about). That is hugely difficult. That’s what should be praised. Although I’d prefer it if he treated his warehouse staff better.
Sorry, rant over.
Otherwise, I agree with you. Uber’s idea should be successful. But rather than try to implement it by solving all the tricky challenges facing then in the real business environment, they chose to take the much easier option of skirt around the law, put the obligation and risk on drivers, and make money off others. They are chancers. They don’t deserve any sympathy. This court case is a great result. Not just for human rights, which it is, but for all businesses that genuinely do try to operate within the law and treat employers fairly, of which there are many.
If Uber can make their business model work and be successful with them having to treat their drivers as formal employees, then they’ll deserve some credit for executing an idea properly, within the law. Already having an app on everyone’s phone should help.
Uber is just another example to me of how the idea is the easy part but the implementation is where the hard yards are. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
