If a company litearlly cant have employees or it will go under, then it shouldn't be classified as an employer.

Image from preview.redd.it and submitted by CorriePelt
image showing If a company litearlly cant have employees or it will go under, then it shouldn't be classified as an employer.

tdomer80 on May 5th, 2021 at 17:50 UTC »

I think it would raise their labor costs about 30% for payroll taxes and fringes. Those would get passed along to the consumers by Uber and Lyft and competitors, and life would go on - people would likely just tip less. I say Uber CEO is full of crap.

Purplepickle16 on May 5th, 2021 at 17:59 UTC »

I've heard the argument that they set their own hours and everything basically explaining why they aren't, what's the argument why they are? Nobody, not even the news, ever talks about that and it's frankly annoying. I want to learn about issues so I can have an educated opinion dammit!

ThatBlackScienceKid on May 5th, 2021 at 21:02 UTC »

Wasn’t part of the appeal not working as a regular employee? Isn’t this how we circle back to taxi systems? I’m legitimately curious.

P.S. I hate Uber.