Are Taxi Drivers Considered Independent Contractors

[25] The OECD`s 2018 Interim Report defines Uber as a pay-as-you-go ride-sharing company and notes that it is “a digital platform that creates value by bringing drivers and passengers together so they can make a ride on a pay-as-you-go basis. It is based on the following main steps. First of all, the rental company recruits drivers with access to their own car. It then centrally orchestrates drivers, monitors e.B their hours of activity and locations to provide a transportation platform. Third, the company is developing a platform, including a mobile app, that will allow passengers to book a ride. Finally, it guarantees the quality of transactions through a verification system in which drivers and passengers have the opportunity to assess the quality of the interaction” (loc. cit., pp. 66/67). As regards (5), Broadway argued that it does not prevent its drivers from hiring their own employees and subcontractors to support the operation of the taxi business. Broadway cited a provision in its driver agreement that gave drivers the power to hire professionals (such as mechanics, accountants, and tax specialists) to help them with their taxi business. The Court concluded that “the services referred to in this provision” are transportation services provided on Broadway and not administrative services provided to taxis or other businesses. A separate provision in the driver agreement prohibited persons other than registered drivers (who had themselves entered into a driver agreement) from driving vehicles on Broadway`s list of registered vehicles.

As a result, the Court found that the drivers did not comply with this requirement. [16] Recently, another legal analysis regarding the operation of Uber was confirmed by the Geneva cantonal government and the head of government, Mr Mauro Poggia, that the services provided by Uber are subject to taxi regulation and that the company should therefore expect a ban if it does not classify its drivers as employees and does not regulate the situation by paying taxes and fines and other compliance obligations. See Hansu Kim, the Flywheel Taxi, the city`s second largest fleet, operates a hybrid model in which about two-thirds of the 300 taxis are owned by medal holders who pay a monthly fee to use Flywheel`s shipping system and colors. Owner-operators drive the taxis themselves and also rent them to other drivers. “In Santa Rosa, I`m the only company left,” Neese said. “They are not independent. They are self-employed,” he said of the drivers. “They have their own franchise license with the Santa Rosa police.” San Francisco taxis were unionized employees until the late 1970s, when an earlier incarnation of Yellow Cab, the dominant operator, collapsed and the city passed Proposition K, which required individual drivers, not businesses, to receive medallions for a small fee in order of seniority. In 2010, the city began selling medallions for $250,000. Many runners now say their medal loan payments are crippling and want the city to buy back the medals.

In this case, the Oregon Department of Employment (the “Department”) assessed Broadway Cab, LLC (“Broadway”) on unemployment insurance taxes on taxi drivers` income associated with Broadway. One of the arguments put forward by Broadway was that the drivers were independent contractors. Relevant facts of the case include a “driving agreement” under which Broadway required drivers to be included in the company`s list of licensed drivers. Drivers paid Broadway driver agreement fees as well as vehicle fees. Drivers were not required to drive their taxi for a minimum number of hours, but limits on maximum daily hours were imposed. Drivers were required to pay the weekly broadway fee, whether or not they chose to drive a taxi during the week, but drivers were allowed to keep money or other payments for rates that exceeded the weekly Broadway fee. Uber and Lyft have no plans to reclassify their drivers despite the law. They are pursuing a voting initiative in 2020 to allow self-employed drivers to receive minimum wage benefits and guarantees. Uber says it will fight the reclassification in court. [13] See employee/43984356.

Employment status “has the potential to kill the taxi industry,” he said. “The taxi companies suddenly couldn`t absorb all these extra costs.” [21] For about 30 years, California labor courts used an 11-factor test conducted in the trial of S.G. Borello & Sons, Inc. v. Labor Relations Division to decide whether a person should be considered an employee. Such precedent was re-examined by the California Supreme Court in 2018 when Dynamex Operations West, Inc.c. The Los Angeles County Supreme Court was analyzed. At that time, it was decided that the ABC test should be used to determine an employee`s qualification. “If we didn`t fight to stay afloat, I would probably support AB5 for taxi drivers,” Marcelo Fonseca, a longtime San Francisco driver, said of the gig labor law. But “in this current market, AB5 is likely to ruin the taxi industry.” For decades, taxi drivers have been classified as independent contractors and therefore cannot join unions. But a case decided last week shows that the legal basis has changed – potentially allowing large parts of the industry to organize. The Court of Appeal initially concluded that the Borello case was decisive, although this occurred in the context of employee composition.

In this case, the Supreme Court held that the primary determinant of whether an employee is an employee or an independent contractor is the extent to which the “employer” has the right to control the details of the work performed. The right to dismiss an employee at will is also strong evidence of an employment relationship. Secondary factors include: Gonzalez said it should be up to every city to understand this, as taxis are controlled at the municipal level. “This is a local problem, and we need to hold local governments accountable for solving the problem,” she said. In Garcia, the plaintiff was a former taxi driver who worked for Border Transportation Group, LLC (BTG). BTG`s business model was to rent taxi permits to drivers through subsidiaries. BTG`s lease expressly stated that the applicant was an independent contractor. In addition, the applicant`s vehicle contained the colour palette and logo of a BTG subsidiary, Calexico Taxi. Finally, BTG allowed the applicant to set his own working hours, use the taxi for his personal rides, keep his own fares, enter into sublease agreements and advertise under his own name. For example, she said, medallion owners could organize themselves into cooperatives and offer drivers shipping, colors and insurance, just as taxi companies currently do.

In Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903 (Dynamex), the California Supreme Court provided a new method for determining whether a person is an employee when making claims under California salary scales. Following Dynamex, an appeals court analyzed whether taxi drivers are employees as part of the new ABC test set out in Dynamex. See Garcia v. Border Transportation Group, LLC (2018) 28 Cal.App.5th 558 (Garcia). .