Live data from Hacker News

If Lyft can't keep its drivers as contractors, it may never be profitable

latimes.com

91–100 of 131 posts

Re: If Lyft can't keep its drivers as contractors, it may never be profitable

#91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money spent on healthcare for employees is untaxed, effectively a 30% bonus.

This isn't standard worldwide. In Canada, health, dental, and other benefits are considered taxable.

Not when health/dental premiums are paid by the employer.

Re: If Lyft can't keep its drivers as contractors, it may never be profitable

#92
post #45
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My cost for health insurance on the group plan? $560/mo. Is that the full cost, or is your employer also paying something?

That's his cost. The employer is probably paying twice that much more behind the scenes. Money they could otherwise be paying him.

Employer negotiated insurances tend to cost less than individually bought ones, because the employer gets a group discount. The larger the group, the bigger the collective discount.

Just like toilet paper, insurances are cheaper when bought in bulk.

Imagine the awesome coverage you'd get as a Lyft or Uber driver if you were actually employed by them.

Re: If Lyft can't keep its drivers as contractors, it may never be profitable

#93
post #7

I'm kind of torn on this. My father has been truck driver his entire life and for the last 20 years worked as a contractor, while driving his own truck and trailer, since it gives him more $$$ than average driver who works as employee. However, he has non-existent social net. No health insurance, no pension benefits. If he out of work or has serious health issues that ground him for months, he has to dig into savings…

If he's earning more than average, and professional truck drivers are pretty well paid, then can't be purchase that social net himself? He can buy health insurance, pension, group income protection, everything you mentioned. I know poor people can't do that, and that's the issue, but why can't a well-paid truck driver do it?

Regulators should set a minimum contractor comp that is significantly higher than the total cost of minimum wage + necessary other costs for security (pensions, healthcare). Obviously minimum wage for employees should also be required to include these benefits (if it doesn’t already).

Otherwise the minimum wage regulation is possible to circumvent with contractor arrangements.

Re: If Lyft can't keep its drivers as contractors, it may never be profitable

#94

Anyone else see these and think about how maybe there should be some other type of worker other than employee or contractor? Those are hard definitions, and creating laws to reflect this type of worker is incredibly difficult considering people and companies figure out loopholes, but really feels like there should be another category to go with this type of work that's going to become more and more common.

Maybe employees with all of the costs and none of the benefits of being independent just shouldn't be a category? Why is it a given that its going to be more common or shall I say allowed to become more common. Crack would be more common if we didn't keep locking up dealers.

Don't be too quick to say "none of the benefits of being independent" though. I've talked to plenty of Lyft drivers who say the biggest benefit is being able to work any hours at any time they want. Want to sleep in and only drive in the afternoon? No problem doing that. Or being a student and having wildly different schedule depending on the day of the week and the week of the semester? Sure. And many know that they are taking a pay cut in exchange for this freedom.

Re: If Lyft can't keep its drivers as contractors, it may never be profitable

#95
post #7

I'm kind of torn on this. My father has been truck driver his entire life and for the last 20 years worked as a contractor, while driving his own truck and trailer, since it gives him more $$$ than average driver who works as employee. However, he has non-existent social net. No health insurance, no pension benefits. If he out of work or has serious health issues that ground him for months, he has to dig into savings…

>more $$$ than average driver who works as employee. However, he has non-existent social net. No health insurance, no pension benefits.

And when those essentials are factored in, does he actually earn mire or less $$$?

Re: If Lyft can't keep its drivers as contractors, it may never be profitable

#96
post #3

Human drivers are just mechanical turks to build market share while self-driving cars become commercially viable.

Human drivers are just mechanical turks to build market share while self-driving cars become commercially viable. Don’t they have to exist before we worry about commercial viability? You’re not the only one talking like FSDV’s are just minutes away, when the truth is that when you cut through the hype and wishful thinking, they’re an indeterminate period of time away. The conversation around this subject reads like p…

Aren't a few of the big players already piloting consumer-accessible taxi programs?

IMO, the stuff which has already been demonstrated is a bit too creepily good for comfort, even if we're talking about limited Tesla autopilot.

Re: If Lyft can't keep its drivers as contractors, it may never be profitable

#97
The epitome of how capitalism can and will cannibalize itself. As corporations move towards maximizing profits for shareholder value, the individuals upon whom they depend on for profits are squeezed out of the system. The more successful companies can produce profits, the less people can afford the very products and services being produced and the companies will have no customers.

Re: If Lyft can't keep its drivers as contractors, it may never be profitable

#98
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a rider, I am going to pick the cheapest ride. If Lyft pays their drivers less, it's because I pay Lyft less. If society as a whole picks Lyft, then it's society as a whole paying Lyft drivers less. I view Lyft more as a market maker rather than a company. In that sense, I agree with you, the market isn't the problem. The people to blame are riders, who got fed up with expensive and bad service taxis, and wanted c…

That’s why some stuff like health care should not be privatized. Because the market will always go against it.

[deleted]

Re: If Lyft can't keep its drivers as contractors, it may never be profitable

#99
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a rider, I am going to pick the cheapest ride. If Lyft pays their drivers less, it's because I pay Lyft less. If society as a whole picks Lyft, then it's society as a whole paying Lyft drivers less. I view Lyft more as a market maker rather than a company. In that sense, I agree with you, the market isn't the problem. The people to blame are riders, who got fed up with expensive and bad service taxis, and wanted c…

That’s why some stuff like health care should not be privatized. Because the market will always go against it.

That is absolutely not true. You're generalising too much. There are many people that are trying to democratise healthcare the private way.

Re: If Lyft can't keep its drivers as contractors, it may never be profitable

#100
post #7

I'm kind of torn on this. My father has been truck driver his entire life and for the last 20 years worked as a contractor, while driving his own truck and trailer, since it gives him more $$$ than average driver who works as employee. However, he has non-existent social net. No health insurance, no pension benefits. If he out of work or has serious health issues that ground him for months, he has to dig into savings…

How much help did he earn? How much does he deserve? The money a driver gets paid is the help. There is a market for non-fulltime jobs that would not exist at all if it was forced to be full time. Forcing Lyft to hire employees instead of contractors won't mean there will be more workers with a safety-net; it means there won't be any Lyft. That would be bad for both drivers and the people being driven.

> Forcing Lyft to hire employees instead of contractors won't mean there will be more workers with a safety-net; it means there won't be any Lyft.

So? If lift fails a better business will come along that can treat employees well. Or someone will make a successful community run app (which gives 95% of fares to employees taking only overhead) will come along to replace uber/lyft since it would actually be treating them as contractors unlike uber/lyft

Post reply on HN