|
|
|
|
|
|
by tashoecraft
4078 days ago
|
|
|
In the article it states that drivers have been fired for not taking a certain percentage of passengers. While it isn't a strict hours, it is firing someone for not meeting their determined amount of work. As she says these companies are square pegs that are trying to be forced into round holes. Uber drivers are not normal independent contractors, but nor are they full employees. I really like Uber, but forcing employees to pay for gas, maintenance, insurance, etc is abusing their position. There needs to be a reclassification that can work for the on demand companies. Place these employees somewhere in between and require certain things be met, maybe pay for gas whilst they are driving passengers, or a stipend for maintenance costs. |
|
|
Drivers are only fired for not taking a certain percentage of rides offered while the driver is logged in and active. That's an enormous distinction.
Drivers don't have be active, and they can go inactive at any time. In fact, over half of the drivers with whom I've ridden are logged into both Uber and Lyft while waiting for a fare, and then log out of the other app when they accept a fare from one. (Yes, I quiz my drivers on the particulars of driving for these services and keep track of what they tell me).
The whole point of threatening to fire (and actually firing) drivers for not meeting acceptance rates seems to be to incentivize them to log out during the times they aren't actually willing to take a fare.