• kru@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s a point in favor of reddit, but a small one. As my company’s labor lawyer enjoys saying, “You can’t contract around the law.” Meaning, an agreement can be nullified by a court that finds the agreement is in violation of a law.

      • GankTopPlz@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Right, but you also can’t create a work agreement where one was explicitly denied. It’s like mowing your neighbors lawn then asking them to pay you, but they told you they wouldn’t pay you if you did it before you started. It’s the same with the 3rd party app devs too. While I think reddits actions are insane and detrimental to the health of the site, they are fully in their right to deny those devs access to their API and their site as a whole.

        • Stovetop@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You sorta can. The difference in your scenario is that your neighbor doesn’t need you to mow their lawn, but Reddit requires moderators in order for the business of Reddit to function.

          Here is a guide published by the state of California about whether someone should qualify as an employee of a company. Read through the first couple pages of checklists and ask yourself if a moderator fits the criteria they’re looking for.

          For the first 3 questions, a “Yes” answer is an indictator that the person is an employee.

          1. Do you instruct or supervise the person while he or she is working?
          • I would say that likely counts as a yes, because moderators have a code of conduct which is mandated by Reddit, and they must follow it in order to keep their jobs.
          1. Can the worker quit or be discharged (fired) at any time?
          • Reddit does not have protections in place for moderators, who can be removed from their positions at any time. Likewise, moderators can walk from their job at any time.
          1. Is the work being performed part of your regular business?
          • This is definitely a yes, because Reddit relies on subreddits for its business, and subreddits require moderators.

          For the next 3 questions, a “No” answer indicates that the person is an employee and not an independent contractor.

          1. Does the worker have a separately established business?
          • This is a bit of a gray area. For the majority of moderators, this would be a no at surface value, but some subreddits that concern a specific product/company sometimes have representatives from that company on the mod team. However another criteria of this category is that moderators have the ability to add/remove other moderators at their discretion, which is an indicator that they qualify as independent contractors and not employees. Should this go to trial, this will be an item that is argued.
          1. Is the worker free to make business decisions which affect his or her ability to profit from the work?
          • This would likely be a no for most moderators. To expand further, one of the example criteria is whether the individual is free to utilize their own tools/resources to do their work, and Reddit limiting API access is specifically one example of this not being the case. But if the subreddit is a front for a business (as in, the subreddit’s primary purpose is to sell/support a paid product or service), it likely would not qualify.
          1. Does the individual have a substantial investment in their job which would subject him or her to a financial risk of loss?
          • Similar to the above, I think this would be a no for most moderators. Reddit controls the platform and dictates what resources moderators are/aren’t allowed to utilize when doing their jobs, so there is no independent financial investment from the moderators that is at risk.

          It’s not cut-and-dry, and I think that’s what might make this difficult to take to court, but the argument certainly exists and the case could at least result in better terms for how Reddit must work with their moderators.

          • GankTopPlz@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Reddit requires moderators in order for the business of Reddit to function.

            no they dont. they literally have a system to democratically promote or suppress posts.

            • Stovetop@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              No, I mean Reddit runs entirely on subreddits for its business, and the infrastructure requires a moderator to exist to create them.

              • GankTopPlz@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Reddit could operate without subreddit moderators. The main reason mods exist is to remove abusive users and bots, both of witch could be handled by the vote system.

    • deejay4am@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It may surprise you to learn that if an EULA/TOS and an actual law conflict, then the law wins.

      Reddit can’t say “nuh-uh doesn’t count if you use our site!” anymore than someone can sign a contract saying it’s ok for you to murder them.

      So the real question is do any of these laws actually allow for the conditions set forth by Reddit to be considered employment?