• Menu
  • Skip to right header navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary navigation
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn

Hood Venture Counsel, P.C.

NYC Corporate Law

  • Home
  • Attorneys
    • Jonathan L. Hood, Esq.
    • Benton J. Levy, Esq.
  • Services
    • Contract Preparation/Review
    • Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
    • Entity Formation
    • Trademark Application
    • Copyright Application
    • Compliance
    • Not-for-Profits
    • Investment
    • Concierge General Counsel
  • Contact
  • Disclaimer

Mobile Menu

  • Home
  • Attorneys
    • Jonathan L. Hood, Esq.
    • Benton J. Levy, Esq.
  • Services
    • Contract Preparation/Review
    • Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
    • Entity Formation
    • Trademark Application
    • Copyright Application
    • Compliance
    • Not-for-Profits
    • Investment
    • Concierge General Counsel
  • Contact
  • Disclaimer

The Uber Employee vs. Independent Contractor Dilemma

November 17, 2015 //  by Jim Hood

By now, you’ve probably heard the story stemmed from a 2014 complaint filed with the California Labor Commissioner by a California Uber driver. The driver wanted Uber to reimburse her for business expenses, including gas and tolls. In arguing that it shouldn’t have to pay, Uber said that the driver was an independent contractor and therefore not entitled to expense reimbursement.

The Commissioner disagreed with Uber, analyzing an 11-step test used in California to determine whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor. ( shares some similarities with the  (PDF) list at the federal level.)

Ultimately, the California Employment Development Department (EDD), an administrative law judge, and the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board all agreed that an Uber driver was an employee and therefore entitled to benefits not available to independent contractors.

The case is interesting on its face, but it doubles as a cautionary tale for anyone involved in running a business. These days, many businesses (especially startups) are misclassifying employees as independent contractors in order to avoid the responsibilities that come with having people on the payroll (carrying workers’ compensation insurance, complying with withholding and payroll requirements, providing benefits, etc.).

While classifying workers as independent contractors may seem like a smart idea in the short term, it can lead to disastrous consequences. Employees who misclassify their workers are exposing themselves to severe financial penalties, and in recent years the IRS has been on . And, of course, even the threat of financial ruin can bring a company down; home-cleaning marketplace Home joy , citing lawsuits from allegedly misclassified workers as one of the causes.

Perhaps because of the heightened exposure the issue has received in recent years, many startups – especially service-focused startups similar to Uber – have begun as employees. Whether this trend continues is anyone’s guess, but it shows that companies and investors alike are paying attention.

 

Category: blogTag: employee, employee misclassification, employment, employment law, Homejoy, independent contractor, Uber

Previous Post: « What Does CAN-SPAM Require?
Next Post: The Mistake That Can Tank Your Business »

Primary Sidebar

Recent Posts

  • Ten Common Startup Business Mistakes to Avoid
  • The Latest on Legalized Cannabis in New York and What It Means for Your New Cannabis Business
  • Trademarks 101 – What You Need to Know About Getting a Trademark
  • C-Corp, S-Corp, or LLC? Choosing the Right Structure for Your Business
  • Six Things You Need to Know Before Starting Your Own Business

Tags

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) apple arbitration bank of america civil rights class action compliance contracts corporate structure corporate taxation corporation criminal justice discrimination ea sports Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) employee employment employment law entrepreneur entrepreneurship Facebook federal trade commission (FTC) Fourth Amendment Gawker gay rights Google hurricane sandy injunction intellectual property law enforcement LLC national football league (NFL) New York City NYPD privacy same-sex marriage s corporation settlement smartphones sports law stop-and-frisk terms of service Terms of Use U.S. Supreme Court
  • Practice Areas
  • Attorneys
  • Success Stories
  • Blog
  • Privacy Policy

Site Footer

Hood Venture Counsel, P.C.

43 W. 43rd Street, Suite 107, New York, NY 10036

Copyright © 2021 · Hood Venture Counsel, P.C. · Web Design by: WarMarks