Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Instacart is playing games with its workers’ pay

recode.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 371 posts

Re: Instacart is playing games with its workers’ pay

#71

Post by jjfine »

CamelCaseName wrote: post #62
grandalf wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say the average wage is $10/hour. If it takes one hour to go and do that shopping, I break even by paying someone else that $10, if I value my leisure time as equivalent to my wage. More likely, most Instacart customers earn much more than $10/hour. For someone with a busy work schedule, there might be 2 hours of leisure time available per day during the week. This means that by using Instacart I increase my after-wo…

When I go to a physical store I frequently end up buying things I didn't really intend to, but with Instacart, I only end up with the things I actually wanted. Specifically what products do you end up buying? I have always wanted some insight as to who buys these items near the register and why, as I rarely see anyone pick them up.

They're not necessarily talking about just those items. The entire store is designed so you buy things you weren't intending to buy. You never said/thought: "Ooh look ice cream's on sale..." and failed to resist?

Re: Instacart is playing games with its workers’ pay

#72

Post by virmundi »

tray5 wrote: post #39
doctorpangloss wrote: post #3

Is it possible to have a value-added services company that doesn't exploit its labor? Is your answer going to be self-driving cars? What about alternatives that don't fundamentally replace the labor? In my opinion, it is impossible to achieve venture capital goals and pay service labor commensurate to the value it delivers.

Profit has to come from somewhere. You can't reimburse the workers the full value of their labour if you wish to make a profit. I'd say that counts as exploitation. Unfortunate, but thats the reality of capitalism.

Is value created by labor necessarily the only way to create value? Can labor by itself cost $10, I pay out $10, but when I combine that labor (a largely undirected force) with thought (scheduling, order placement, etc) I get a multiplier over the labor?

It seems like it should be possible to do this. I pay for raw, undirected labor. It's like raw iron. When I use my skills for planning (speaking as the management for the company), I can pay full price for labor, but get synergistic effect not possible without thought? To keep with the iron reference, in the end I produce steel or even better a car. Seems like the labor to extract the iron met a multiplier of my metallurgic enhancements.

Re: Instacart is playing games with its workers’ pay

#73

Post by CaliforniaKarl »

soheil wrote: post #59

I don't understand the outrage, I like Amazon Fresh even more, next to the tipping box it specifically says in big letters tipping is neither required nor expected and defaults to zero. If the current laws regarding minimum wage are inadequate why not try to pass new laws instead of trying to read between the lines on why Instacart moved an input box and put it somewhere else? Why keep things murky? If it is against…

The problem with bringing up the minimum wage is because it doesn't apply here. Quoting chron.com[1]:

"The Fair Labor Standards Act does not apply the minimum wage payment requirement to independent contractors. However, merely classifying a person as a contractor instead of an employee does not automatically keep the worker from being considered an employee entitled to minimum wage."

Searching around led me to [2], which talks about Form 1099-MISC, which is used for independent contractors. On the other hand, I found [3], which makes me think that some can choose to become part-time employees, but I don't know what the status of that is.

It's also worth noting that, for full-time employees, vehicle-miles traveled are often reimbursed for car usage as part of the employee's work. I don't know if that's being done here, and that would be a major expense. It would also be an expense that your normal full-time employee would not have to pay, as they wouldn't use their car as often.

[1]: http://work.chron.com/minimum-wage-apply-contractors-1758.ht... [2]: https://payable.com/taxes/understanding-your-instacart-1099 [3]: https://www.wired.com/2015/06/instacart-shoppers-can-now-cho...

Re: Instacart is playing games with its workers’ pay

#75

Post by grandalf »

paulcole wrote: post #64
grandalf wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say the average wage is $10/hour. If it takes one hour to go and do that shopping, I break even by paying someone else that $10, if I value my leisure time as equivalent to my wage. More likely, most Instacart customers earn much more than $10/hour. For someone with a busy work schedule, there might be 2 hours of leisure time available per day during the week. This means that by using Instacart I increase my after-wo…

>I break even by paying someone else that $10, if I value my leisure time as equivalent to my wage. I value my leisure time at the arbitrary amount of $1000/hr. Have I broken even if I pay $1000 to someone so they'll do my grocery shopping?

Yes, that is exactly why people part with money in exchange for things they could do equally well on their own.

Re: Instacart is playing games with its workers’ pay

#76

Post by [deleted] »

paulcole wrote: post #64
grandalf wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say the average wage is $10/hour. If it takes one hour to go and do that shopping, I break even by paying someone else that $10, if I value my leisure time as equivalent to my wage. More likely, most Instacart customers earn much more than $10/hour. For someone with a busy work schedule, there might be 2 hours of leisure time available per day during the week. This means that by using Instacart I increase my after-wo…

>I break even by paying someone else that $10, if I value my leisure time as equivalent to my wage. I value my leisure time at the arbitrary amount of $1000/hr. Have I broken even if I pay $1000 to someone so they'll do my grocery shopping?

[deleted]

Re: Instacart is playing games with its workers’ pay

#77

Post by maverick_iceman »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #60
nashadelic wrote: post #58

Not a US citizen but I find the whole tipping experience rather stressful and an additional item to worry about. I like it that Uber has it built into the service and there's only one thing to pay. I'd rather pay a flat increase on the menu and expect higher staff salaries than to have the delivery boy/waiter be at my mercy of tipping.

Note there have been several articles about how some Uber drivers give lower ratings to riders who don't tip in cash.

I often take Pool and have seen most drivers giving 5 stars to co-passengers even though they didn't tip. In SF nobody tips anyway.

Re: Instacart is playing games with its workers’ pay

#78

Post by bluejekyll »

pshposh wrote: post #30
biot wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's basically Webvan 3.0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webvan

I was thinking of Kozmo.com which funnily enough also went defunct in 2001. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kozmo.com Although they did more than just food.

I loved Kozmo. I used them at least once a week; I still miss them.

Re: Instacart is playing games with its workers’ pay

#79

Post by sib »

tray5 wrote: post #39
doctorpangloss wrote: post #3

Is it possible to have a value-added services company that doesn't exploit its labor? Is your answer going to be self-driving cars? What about alternatives that don't fundamentally replace the labor? In my opinion, it is impossible to achieve venture capital goals and pay service labor commensurate to the value it delivers.

Profit has to come from somewhere. You can't reimburse the workers the full value of their labour if you wish to make a profit. I'd say that counts as exploitation. Unfortunate, but thats the reality of capitalism.

"You can't reimburse the workers the full value of their labour"

But this is exactly the point.

* Assume that hamburger ingredients cost $2. * Assume that hamburgers sell for $5 each.

==> Net added value per hamburger is $3.

* Assume that a worker can make 1 hamburger per hour manually. * Assume that the same worker can make 10 hamburgers per hour after the business owner has invested in a $300 hamburger machine. * Assume that the same worker can make 100 hamburgers per hour after the business owner has invested in a $1000 hamburger machine.

==> Is the "full value of the worker's labor" $3 / hour, $30 / hour, or $300 / hour?

The worker's value add is not solely dependent on the worker and the products being created, but also on the capital invested by the business owner (and other factors). Just because the worker is not paid the entire economic value added being produced by the business does not mean s/he is being exploited.

Re: Instacart is playing games with its workers’ pay

#80

Post by soheil »

developer2 wrote: post #63
soheil wrote: post #59

I don't understand the outrage, I like Amazon Fresh even more, next to the tipping box it specifically says in big letters tipping is neither required nor expected and defaults to zero. If the current laws regarding minimum wage are inadequate why not try to pass new laws instead of trying to read between the lines on why Instacart moved an input box and put it somewhere else? Why keep things murky? If it is against…

So Amazon Fresh has an optional tip . Instacart is adding a default 10% fee that goes into their pockets - it is not a tip. And they do not pass the 10% fee on to the employees in wages - it stays as part of their bottom line. Higher-ups realized just how much the tips are worth, are now stealing them by default behind a purposely confusing interface that their customers cannot understand, and pocketing the differenc…

I understand it's not the most conventional way of doing it, but why it's someone "higher up" and that's a bad thing? Instacart is not Mother Teresa, its sole purpose is to make profit and I want it to do that as much as it possibly can. I want this service to exist so I don't have to feel like a chimp in a grocery store with a basket going from aisle to aisle in fact why do I even need to justify why I want it to exist? I am willing to give them my money for the services they provide, period.

Again if someone thinks what they're doing is illegal or should be illegal one day then either take them to court or change the laws!

Post reply on HN