[saas_co_de]

> that contract looks like it's demanding exclusive employment for a particular company within a given time range

The ruling specifically says that this is not the case:

"The driver is not precluded from doing business with others and Grubhub does not have the right to restrict the driver from being concurrently or subsequently engaged in performing delivery services for other companies, even those that compete with Grubhub."

I am actually pretty impressed with the efforts Grubhub was making for compliance here.

"The driver may (1) lease insulated delivery bags from Grubhub in exchange for wearing Grubhub t-shirts and hats"

Since requiring someone to wear a uniform or use your logo is a strong sign of an employment relationship they make wearing the uniform consideration for a separate contract. Clever.

[maxerickson]

It's sort of generous to call the imaginary "second" relationship an effort at compliance.

[bonesss]

> "The driver may (1) lease insulated delivery bags from Grubhub in exchange for wearing Grubhub t-shirts and hats"

So if another source of bags were founds the Grubhub contractors could be wearing clothes that advertise a competing service, or is loaded with restaurant sponsorships, to make more money? Hrmmm...