> If a driver is logged into Uber and Doordash and GrubHub on 3 phones waiting for a delivery they probably should not be accruing $17.96*3 per hour at that time.
Why not? The entire shtick of Uber et al is that employees choose their hours and gain "freedom" from employees. This is what freedom looks like. Employers can't tell freelance contractors how they should behave. They decide a contract, they get a service and get their job done.
It's mostly not whether they can contractually demand any one particular thing. It's the sum total of behavioral and financial control they exert. Exclusivity would be a pretty big ticked box.
If Uber/Doordash tick enough of those questions, then they are at risk of having to treat their drivers as employees. Which is more expensive.
How will they stay in business? Of course they would have to raise prices significantly, but people just wouldn’t order takeout anymore and would rather pick up themselves.
Other than the obvious authoritarianism, that would also harm the environment with people driving a lot more.
i think parent means that the company can stop them from working two jobs at the same time. not allowing that is still legal. illegal non-competes are only about switching jobs.
Yeah, that's what I meant. I wonder if it is even legal to work two jobs as an employee paid by the hour at the same time. Sounds like that might be fraud.
Why not? The entire shtick of Uber et al is that employees choose their hours and gain "freedom" from employees. This is what freedom looks like. Employers can't tell freelance contractors how they should behave. They decide a contract, they get a service and get their job done.