What loophole? Did I miss something? The law was explicitly designed to force Uber et al to pay drivers more per hour. How on earth is it surprising that the ride share companies turn around and don’t want to pay drivers these minimums when they’re not confident demand is sufficient to compensate?
It’s exactly what many people have said about minimum wage laws for a long time: it makes it illegal to have a job unless you can produce $X in value per hour. Maybe as society we’re ok with that, but it’s lunacy to pretend there are no consequences.
If that was the general effect of minimum wage, nobody would be paid minimum wage. They'd either be paid their true value higher than minimum wage, or be unemployed if their true value was even one cent lower.
By dictating when the drivers can and can't work, it seems the rideshare companies convert the drivers to employees. Contractors get to choose when they work.
Side note: the lying message provided to drivers is particularly scummy: "TLC rules force us to limit access". No they don't. A desire for more money convinces them to limit access.
Many contracted projects are contracted on a longer timescale, often weeks or months, compared to ridesharing where the outputs are expected within minutes. Contractors in other fields can often choose when to work on a day-to-day basis, but their next project will only materialize if the demand is there.
> Contractors get to choose when they work.
Definitely not true of software contractors.
It should be.
When I've contracted, the general expectation is "make yourself available for agile ceremonies" and a desire for timely collaboration.
If your customer is setting your hours, then they may be breaking labor laws.
[dead]
[dead]