Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts • Hacker News Board

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#91

Post by exclusiv » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 6:02 PM UTC

nanny wrote: post #49

tyoverby wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the article? > Airbnb said it would also accelerate the use of instant bookings, which lets renters book places immediately without host approval. The fact that the author of your parent-comment does go through and approve individuals means that this policy would hurt him/her.

What evidence is there that instant booking guests are more destructive than others? >The fact that the author of your parent-comment does go through and approve individuals means that this policy would hurt him/her. How, exactly? It sounds like he talked to his destructive guest before the rental. So that particular guest was not an instant booking.

I posted an example above but instant book doesn't force a potential renter to be screened which makes it easier for destructive guests to book. If you're throwing a party, would you rather instant book or have to chat with the host?

As my example, if a renter instant books and is going to bring 40 people to a place you are legally approved locally for sleeping 14, other neighbors can report you to the city and you could be fined or lose your license to rent.

So you can have issues with instant bookers even if they aren't destructive.

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#92

Post by cmurf » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 6:03 PM UTC

exelius wrote: post #81

RodericDay wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could agree with this. But, since the government will have to do all this inspection, I guess you agree that they will have to levy a tax on AirBnB to pay for it?

I doubt Airbnb would agree with that -- since it would make their rentals much less attractive when compared to hotels (which have taxes around 15-20% in most big cities).

Ok then their model succeeds mainly on the basis that it's freeloading by being an exception to rules that apply to hotels. They're cheaper because they're not doing pretty much any of the things hotels are required to do, not just limited to taxes, but including the various health inspection regimes that states require for places of public accommodation including hotels.

So yeah, you don't have to clean as well as a hotel if you don't want, you don't have to pay the taxes as a hotel or even a regular long term rental unit if you can get away with it (thinking IRS will consider a portion of your house converted into business property and thus subject to business property gains tax when you sell the house, but not limited to this), you don't have to follow or even give notice that you don't follow ADA, on and on, because AirBnB doesn't verify any of this and it's claimed it's not their responsibility to do so; but they also don't support even a licensing program by municipalities and rental history reporting so that these municipalities could do their own verifications.

Basically if you even the playing field across the board between an AirBnB and hotel, you end up with something like an actual Bed & Breakfast (although typically without breakfast but often with access to a kitchen). All things actually being equal, even price per square foot, I'd probably pick an AirBnB, but I actively avoid it whenever possible because I think their success mainly constitutes free loading (and enabling it by property owners)

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#93

Post by tedmiston » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 6:04 PM UTC

I've always considered it a legitimate request when people want to live with others of the same gender for a shared room in their home.

For example, you especially see this on sites like Craigslist when people are seeking roommates. This policy seems to overturn the ability of hosts to do this. If I were a female in an all female home renting out one room, it would make me uncomfortable. Perhaps other do not see this as an issue in short-term renting, but I do.

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#94

Post by yummyfajitas » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 6:05 PM UTC

rmxt wrote: post #86

yummyfajitas wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please learn some history. Businesses in the American south were legally required to discriminate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow_laws One of the major motivations in keeping Jim Crow laws was to prevent economic competition (a "race to the bottom") between whites and non-whites. See also FDR's pro-union/pro-white policies.

Linking to Wikipedia without expounding which details you are referring to is a bit of sleight of hand. Specifically, what part of "separate but equal" [1] "legally required" that "separate" facilities for blacks have poorer conditions than the facilities for whites? I speculate that it's embedded cultural beliefs of hatred and superiority/inferiority (or, at a minimum, apathy) that caused those poorer conditions and…

If you scroll up, you'll see Frondo asserting that "It [discrimination] didn't hurt businesses in the American south enough to compel them to stop discriminating."

Frondo is attempting to argue that market forces don't punish people (much) for discrimination. I'm simply pointing out that market forces weren't even allowed. People discriminated because the law said things like this:

"No colored barber shall serve as a barber [to] white women or girls."

"Any instructor who shall teach in any school, college or institution where members of the white and colored race are received and enrolled as pupils for instruction shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor..."

"No persons, firms, or corporations, who or which furnish meals to passengers at station restaurants or station eating houses, in times limited by common carriers of said passengers, shall furnish said meals to white and colored passengers in the same room, or at the same table, or at the same counter."

" Every person...operating...any public hall, theatre, opera house, motion picture show or any place of public entertainment or public assemblage which is attended by both white and colored persons, shall separate the white race and the colored race..."

http://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/links/misclink/examples/homepa...

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#95

Post by tedmiston » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 6:06 PM UTC

dilap wrote: post #6

I don't know if this is really a tractable problem. At the end of the day, either airbnb lets hosts decide who stays or doesn't. If they don't let hosts decide, they'll likely lose a ton of hosts, since having someone stay in your home is a very personal thing and a huge risk. If they do, then they're going to have significant discrimination problems as long as people are discriminatory, i.e., basically forever.

> At the end of the day, either airbnb lets hosts decide who stays or doesn't.

Why not both? That's essentially what Instant Book does — let Airbnb decide who stays instead of the host.

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#96

Post by bduerst » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 6:07 PM UTC

MaxGabriel wrote: post #35

untog wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really relevant here. The article is specifically about racial discrimination.

The article says that one way AirBnB is handling racial discrimination is to "accelerate the use of instant bookings, which lets renters book places immediately without host approval." It's not AirBnB's goal, but as a side effect it would affect bobjordan, so it is relevant. (edit: it would depend on how they implement more instant booking. If they just encouraged renters to use it (but could they just encourage and…

If you don't turn on instant bookings with your property, then you don't have anything to worry about.

https://www.airbnb.com/help/article/484/what-is-instant-book

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#97

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 6:08 PM UTC

jasode wrote: post #83

dragonwriter wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> since Airbnb has been around for 8 years and no states' attorney generals nor courts have ruled Airbnb to definitively be a "broker" I said "brokering service" rather than "broker" for a reason, as a shorthand for a broad class of services (the exclusion from the fair housing exemption extends to any use of rental or sales services of a broker, agent, or any person in the business or rental or sales; this is much b…

>I said "brokering service" rather than "broker" for a reason, as a shorthand for a broad class of services And what makes Airbnb a "brokering service"? Is it the 3% fee collected upfront instead of commissions being billed monthly like Ebay? Therefore, if Airbnb collected money differently to avoid the label of being a brokering "service", would the outrage about discrimination really be avoided? I doubt it. >direct…

> And what makes Airbnb a "brokering service"?

The fact that they take a commission (rather than, e.g., a size-of-listing-based listing fee, the way newspaper classifieds would), handle rental reservations, cancellations, mediate refund requests, and act as a payment intermediary, etc., all seem to point to them being a person in the rental business providing rental services, rather than a mere listing venue like a newspaper classified or bulletin board.

> Is it the 3% fee collected upfront instead of commissions being billed monthly like Ebay?

No, I can't see that that would be in any way relevant.

> Therefore, if Airbnb collected money differently to avoid the label of being a brokering "service", would the outrage about discrimination really be avoided?

If they changed what they collected money for, sure, but that's not a scheduling thing, its what the basis of payment is and what services they are providing.

> What would Airbnb have to change to meet that definition?

As I see it, they'd need to act as a listing venue rather than a deeply-involved intermediary in the rental transaction. Their fundamental business model, IOW, would have to change.

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#98

Post by exelius » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 6:09 PM UTC

cmurf wrote: post #92

exelius wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt Airbnb would agree with that -- since it would make their rentals much less attractive when compared to hotels (which have taxes around 15-20% in most big cities).

Ok then their model succeeds mainly on the basis that it's freeloading by being an exception to rules that apply to hotels. They're cheaper because they're not doing pretty much any of the things hotels are required to do, not just limited to taxes, but including the various health inspection regimes that states require for places of public accommodation including hotels. So yeah, you don't have to clean as well as a…

I agree with you -- Uber succeeded for many of the same reasons. They found a weak, fragmented, and hyper localized regulatory environment (very similar to that of hotels) that they could overwhelm with global scale after building up in a few "friendly" markets.

I suspect Google was trying to do the same with Google Fiber, but found the opposition (in the form of AT&T / Verizon / Comcast / TWC / Charter / Cox) was too organized and entrenched.

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#99

Post by untog » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 6:11 PM UTC

exclusiv wrote: post #85

ekianjo wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's relevant is that AirBnB is against the Freedom of Owners to select who stays at their place. In the end Owners should have the final word, no matter what, certainly not AirBnB.

I agree even if AirBnB is the booking driver. 1) AirBnB has a history of poor support for hosts that have troublesome renters. 2) AirBnB does a terrible job screening renters. 3) This could be easily used against a host improperly. I had a group of sorority girls that wanted to book my house. They told me they had almost 40 women so I declined. I don't have a problem with women but this could be used against me in a…

Let's say someone is bigoted and they own a company - if you're a potential employee in a group they dislike, do you really want to spend your days in their workplace? Also, what are the chances that the bigoted employer is going to provide a good experience or career progression when required?

...so we're cool with dropping employment discrimination laws too?

Re: Airbnb Adopts Rules in Effort to Fight Discrimination by Its Hosts

#100

Post by tedmiston » Thu, Sep 08, 2016, 6:15 PM UTC

ovis wrote: post #32

jasode wrote: post #12

>Airbnb said it would also accelerate the use of instant bookings, which lets renters book places immediately without host approval. Maybe I'm naive but it seems like that policy would be perceived by hosts as extremely hostile. Homeowners have both a financial and emotional vested interest in their homes so letting strangers book it without a cursory check isn't going to work. Having no checks would work for real es…

What if there was a reputation threshold for a traveller to make an instant booking? Of course it's still not immune to racism or sexism, but it seems that it would provide a decent buffer against it.

As a frequent traveler and often last minute booker, I only use Instant Book, particularly for its convenience.

Some hosts will take several days to respond which can drag the normal booking process into a week if you need to exchange a few questions. I just don't have time for that and want booking to be simple.