If Instacart can't afford to pay their employees, then they should not operate. They are stealing tips from their employees to make profit. It is unethical to use their service. Stop using it and write them an e-mail explaining why. Feel free to resume using it if they stop this practice and apologize.
Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received a large tip
391–400 of 718 posts
Re: Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received a large tip
#392Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nothing. Sure, INDIVIDUALS are at fault for a variety of options, but if you're looking to blame the poor as a group for something, you're using the wrong criteria, since it's a status that has no direct mapping to choice.
So the rich, powerful and elite are also not responsible for anything either? Just individually? That seems like quite the atomised society.
From that which is given much, much is expected.
Re: Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received a large tip
#393Earlier quoted context omitted.
Especially in the US. Just look at their ancient measuring system.
Hey, I really enjoy the imperial system (besides fahrenhiet). It gets more fun when you get beyond yards and pounds and into stones, hundredweight, and imperial tons and rods, chords, and furlongs.
Oddly, in Ireland, we often still use feet, inches, and stone, but mostly only for measuring _people_.
Re: Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received a large tip
#394Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your comment suggests that it's ok to directly support bad businesses because you're probably also indirectly supporting bad businesses. If that's not what you meant, can you please clarify?
Moreso that participating in modern society is impossible without doing business with companies who have unsavory labor and environmental practices. I'm not commenting on morality. Expecting some sort of change to come from spontaneous, collective consumer action is ridiculous. This is especially true when most consumers in America are not on financially stable ground themselves, and can't afford to spend more money…
"and can't afford to spend more money"
These things never start from the poorest doing these things though. They start with the middle and upper classes, because the do have the money, and companies chase that money.
Yes if everyone rolled over and did nothing, instcart would win.
What percentage of that richer demographic would have to switch to a competitor for it to start hurting? A demographic that includes journalists and 'influencers', that are willing and able to pay more, and are able to tell the world about it?
Re: Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received a large tip
#395[deleted]
Re: Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received a large tip
#396Why doesn't the headline read "Instacart (YC S12)"?
Unless the mods add the YC tag posthumously to posts that forget it, it is the mistake of the original poster
Re: Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received a large tip
#397Seriously, this is the responsibility consumers have in a free market. If there's behavior you don't like, move on. You don't get to complain about bad actors when you're literally keeping them in business.
I wonder if we can gamify this. Where your social media profile can display badges if you don't use various services. I imagine that's next to impossible.
Re: Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received a large tip
#398There's a related blog post up on Medium by this same group (Working Washington) where they placed the same order, once with tip and once without, so people could directly compare. From my perspective Instacart is stealing from its customers and workers by doing this. I'm a huge fan of instacart (my fiance and I use it regularly), but this is definitely going to push me away from the platform. At a minimum I'm going…
[deleted]
Re: Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received a large tip
#399Earlier quoted context omitted.
This kind of assumption (that you must optimize your behavior for common good) is unrealistic. Only "good people" will do so, and that caring will put them at a competitive disadvantage compared to people who simply don't care. No, regulation has the possibility of leveling the playing field and making everyone behave in a certain way, irrespective of how good or bad they are.
> Only "good people" will do so, and that caring will put them at a competitive disadvantage compared to people who simply don't care. That's always the case. If you recycle, you are at a competitive disadvantaged compared to people who don't care. If you are veggie as well. Or if you help your kids to do their homework. Do you think it's unreasonable to promote recycling ? It's not a binary choice, it's a spectrum a…
It's unreasonable to expect that promoting recycling alone leads to systematic recycling of non-precious materials. Recycling is the law in places where it is considered commonplace.
Swedes don't just love recycling; the government makes it worthwhile by increasing the cost of not-recycling (fines, jail time).
Re: Instacart paying 80 cents an hour because worker received a large tip
#400Startup culture is a study in psychopathy. - lack of empathy: Uber, Instacart, etc. etc. etc., exploiting the poor - parasitic behavior: aggressive tax optimisation/tax evasion, Amazon employees relying on food stamps for subsistance - superficial charm: get rich quick - pathological lying: cf. Facebook denying they ever did anything wrong - manipulativeness: "make the world more open and connected" and my personal f…
That's quite a broad generalization. For sure a lot of the biggest names have done ethically questionable things. It's no doubt that growing that fast and gaining that much power is going to hugely amplify whatever ethical flaws the founders have. And no one is ethically perfect. That's not to excuse Uber, Facebook, Google, Amazon or any of the more egregious companies. But it's just a case of confirmation bias if yo…
[deleted]