Your example handyman can negotiate on rates, serve the same client in the future (with the possibility of a re-negotiated rate), and set their own terms and co

Your example handyman can negotiate on rates, serve the same client in the future (with the possibility of a re-negotiated rate), and set their own terms and conditions for providing the service. None of that applies to drivers who can either choose to take what they're given or quit. I can't find a reason why that the court's criteria isn't sound. Can you find one?