Google Sued By Express Delivery Driver

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Classifying drivers as independent contractors doesn't seem to be working out for all these tech companies.

A driver for Google's same day delivery service filed a proposed class action lawsuit against the company on Friday, alleging it improperly classified her as an independent contractor and owes expenses. The case, filed in a Massachusetts state court, comes days after Amazon Prime Now drivers filed a similar lawsuit against Amazon.com Inc in California.
 
They're still going to try. As Independent Contractors, the company isn't responsible for benefits (including medical or retirement) or liability. Literally cuts operating costs in half.

Welcome to the 21st century economy.
 
I don't understand why contractors are going after their company's customers for these things. They need to take it up with their employers. In this case it sounds like such a case would have no merit seeing as the woman is self-employed. If you choose to go into business for yourself like this you take all this into your own hands. You can't do that, and then not take responsibility for yourself.
 
Quix said:
If you choose to go into business for yourself like this you take all this into your own hands. You can't do that, and then not take responsibility for yourself.
Click to expand...

But isn't this what our American court system is based upon?: People blaming others for the choices that they themselves made.
 
Quix said:
If you choose to go into business for yourself like this you take all this into your own hands. You can't do that, and then not take responsibility for yourself.
Click to expand...

I don't know what your definition is of "going into business for yourself"

she was hired by an intermediary courier service but is required to work only for Google during her shift.
Click to expand...
But this does not sound like it, she's hired by courier service but that courier service can dictate who she delivers for? Yeah... no. That's not your own business.
 
sfsuphysics said:
I don't know what your definition is of "going into business for yourself"


But this does not sound like it, she's hired by courier service but that courier service can dictate who she delivers for? Yeah... no. That's not your own business.
Click to expand...

That's our economy now. It just happens that this is the style of how many companies hired software engineers, and now they're expanding it beyond programmers. Direct hires working for companies are becoming much more rare today.
 
Perhaps people should better understand the terms under which they are being hired, prior to accepting the job in the first place.
 
Nytegard said:
That's our economy now. It just happens that this is the style of how many companies hired software engineers, and now they're expanding it beyond programmers. Direct hires working for companies are becoming much more rare today.
Click to expand...

Oh no I get that, I just don't like it, companies are really skirting the line of "independent workers" these are not people who have their own business who get jobs everywhere, they are working for these companies often in a full time capacity but they're somehow legally getting to classify them as "independent" and if you have any issues with that you're fired. Where as workers that are not independent can't be fired for requesting stuff like overtime because legally they have to provide that.
 
How is this different from how contract workers have always been classified? When I first started working in the late 80's I had several contract assignments where I was employed by a contract agency (Manpower, etc) but working exclusively for the hiring company. All my benefits (if any) were through the contract agency and I was never associated with the contracting company. Unless I am missing something this is the same process.

I am not sure what these lawsuits hope to gain though. The companies that employ contractors do so for cost purposes and where the required skills allow them to. There are generally very few engineers/executives working as contractors whereas that number greatly increases for lower skill level workers. Even if they win (which is doubtful) there are only two possible outcomes: the company hires only direct workers but hires a lot fewer of them to maintain the same cost burden rate or the company finds a way to hire no one (outsourcing or job elimination). The only real winners here will be the lawyers.
 
kbrickley said:
How is this different from how contract workers have always been classified? When I first started working in the late 80's I had several contract assignments where I was employed by a contract agency (Manpower, etc) but working exclusively for the hiring company. All my benefits (if any) were through the contract agency and I was never associated with the contracting company. Unless I am missing something this is the same process.

I am not sure what these lawsuits hope to gain though. The companies that employ contractors do so for cost purposes and where the required skills allow them to. There are generally very few engineers/executives working as contractors whereas that number greatly increases for lower skill level workers. Even if they win (which is doubtful) there are only two possible outcomes: the company hires only direct workers but hires a lot fewer of them to maintain the same cost burden rate or the company finds a way to hire no one (outsourcing or job elimination). The only real winners here will be the lawyers.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of contract engineers out there. They work for companies like Tek Systems and Infosys, but they're companies hire them on a contract basis. Now I believe most are technically employees of the contracting firm, but the company they work at (let's say it's IBM) considers them contractors.

What makes this particular case a tough call is that they're being told who they can work for, but they're also supplying all of their work supplies/equipment.

My guts says the contracting service is an employer, but it's a tougher call than most contract engineers, who are given a computer by one of the parties.
 
kbrickley said:
How is this different from how contract workers have always been classified? When I first started working in the late 80's I had several contract assignments where I was employed by a contract agency (Manpower, etc) but working exclusively for the hiring company. All my benefits (if any) were through the contract agency and I was never associated with the contracting company. Unless I am missing something this is the same process.

I am not sure what these lawsuits hope to gain though.
Click to expand...
It probably hopes to change this practice, and give equal protection to all workers regardless of how they are hired for a company.
 
sfsuphysics said:
But this does not sound like it, she's hired by courier service but that courier service can dictate who she delivers for? Yeah... no. That's not your own business.
Click to expand...

"Only during her shift" - why is that an issue? If I'm doing contracted work, when I'm on the clock for that company, I can't split the time doing work for another company and charge the company for the time spent on shift. Now, if she's not getting paid for time without deliveries (i.e. she is told "you may only deliver for us during the time you're on our contract, but are only paid if there are deliveries for you to make") that's a whole different ball of wax.
 
Laws that pertain to 1099 (independent contracting) are being abused left and right and these laws are extremely specific as to who can and who cannot be a contractor. The criteria is pretty black and white on this.
 
gamerk2 said:
They're still going to try. As Independent Contractors, the company isn't responsible for benefits (including medical or retirement) or liability. Literally cuts operating costs in half.

Welcome to the 21st century economy.
Click to expand...

Do you think having C & D string employees doesn't cost anything? Normally that's what would happen.

Oh yeah, we have no job opportunities because we're flooding the labor market and channeling the overflow into other sectors to keep jobs scarce there too.

Thank the Obama/Wallstreet functioning as intended economy.
 
Tawnos said:
"Only during her shift" - why is that an issue? If I'm doing contracted work, when I'm on the clock for that company, I can't split the time doing work for another company and charge the company for the time spent on shift. Now, if she's not getting paid for time without deliveries (i.e. she is told "you may only deliver for us during the time you're on our contract, but are only paid if there are deliveries for you to make") that's a whole different ball of wax.
Click to expand...

She's probably getting paid on a per-delivery basis. Thus, if she could also work for Amazon Prime Now, Uber, Lyft, ect ect while delivering for Google Express, she could be making much more per mile traveled...If she were allowed to work for other clients, as an Independent business owner should be able to do.

Legit lawsuit.

These tech companies should stop asking their delivery contracts to subsidize their business model with illegal requirements and/or hiring practices. You can have your employee do exactly what you want, or you can contract an independent business owner to perform a specific task, but you can't independently contract your employee to perform a specific task exactly as you want.
 
if a company tells you that you have to work "overtime" if you want to continue to work for them then you should have every right to collect overtime pay for doing so whether or not they company hires you directly, indirectly or whatever.
 
sfsuphysics said:
if a company tells you that you have to work "overtime" if you want to continue to work for them then you should have every right to collect overtime pay for doing so whether or not they company hires you directly, indirectly or whatever.
Click to expand...

As long as you aren't Exempt ... I have spend my entire career as an Exempt employee so overtime isn't even an option
 
kbrickley said:
As long as you aren't Exempt ... I have spend my entire career as an Exempt employee so overtime isn't even an option
Click to expand...

that's my point, the exempt list is way too far reaching. Probably getting her as a "driver" exempt status because she's making deliveries. That list needs to be hacked down to size.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top