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

California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 754 posts

Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees

#151

Post by kmlx »

droidno9 wrote: post #43

For those of you who want to read the bill: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.x... . The pertinent part of the bill: 2750.3. (a) (1) For purposes of the provisions of this code and the Unemployment Insurance Code, and for the wage orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, a person providing labor or services for remuneration shall be considered an employee rather than an independent contra…

it's not clear to me. if i work as a contractor for software development companies in California, will I be classified as an employee?

'cause these look like every long-term contractor needs to become an employee in one way or another.

Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees

#152

Post by tcard »

9HZZRfNlpR wrote: post #65
pcwalton wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California already has among the most generous state-level medical benefits in the country. Here, it's hard to be in a situation in which one simultaneously can't afford insurance and doesn't qualify for Medicare or Medi-Cal (California Medicaid). Singling out California for not taking the unprecedented step of rolling out single-payer alone--which is a difficult proposition to say the least in a country that guarant…

Well, I would assume they offer healthcare to people who are working or are disabled and not able to work. It's not like you get healthcare in Europe for not putting anything back in the system. Freedom of movement is not a problem in this case.

Yes, you do, in countries with universal healthcare, such as Spain. Even to undocumented immigrants.

Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees

#153

Post by geocar »

username90 wrote: post #136
fragmede wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> moving between states as hard as moving between EU countries It depends on the country of origin, but for many, moving between EU countries is about as moving between states is now. There's some bureaucracy to deal with, but it's not like moving between states in the US is hassle free. Most US states require immigrants from other states get a local drivers license and local car registration, which requires multiple…

Can you move to another EU country without a job and receive benefits? If I recall correctly you need a job to be allowed to stay in another country even in EU. I think free movement even without employment is the main reason states can't enact too many benefits in US.

> Can you move to another EU country without a job and receive benefits?

Europeans generally refer to "being on benefits" as unemployment allowance, and no, you cannot move from a poor European country to a rich one to get a higher standard of living unless you can work, or can be supported by someone who works. Certain kinds of social programs in the US have this property as well.

Americans often refer to medical care/insurance as a "benefit", which might be confusing here, but yes you absolutely can (as a European) move to another country without a job and still get medical care in the area you have just moved to.

Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees

#154

Post by hdfbdtbcdg »

fiblye wrote: post #85
hayksaakian wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your case seems to be a consequence of how healthcare works in America (insurance). For those of us lucky enough to be in good health, the "Gig economy" as-described would be just fine.

And good drivers can save lots of cash and worries by simply not getting car insurance. Health insurance’s main alleged draw is that shit happens when you least expect it, and you can avoid the massive costs when the unexpected happens (accidents, cancer, botulism, whatever). Unfortunately, someone in America found out you can charge monthly fees for health insurance while still making the person pay massive amounts…

> And good drivers can save lots of cash and worries by simply not getting car insurance.

Only if they are rich enough to post a rather large bond.

Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees

#155

Post by [deleted] »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #32
toomuchtodo wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems exceedingly unlikely to occur, regardless of ad spend, in a state as progressive politically as California (similar to AirBnB’s tone deaf failed ad campaign in San Francisco). This assumes gig companies haven’t exhausted their runway by then. Humorously, Uber and Lyft thought they might extinguish taxis if they waited them out long enough, and then the California government did the same to them.

You’d be surprised. Californians love their ability to Uber, if this gets rid of that (or severely curtails it), they would have no problem overriding the legislature at the ballot box.

[deleted]

Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees

#156

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

Barrin92 wrote: post #138
jackmodern wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

don't know why this is getting down voted, all of you folks using lyft/uber.. get ready for the prices to double or triple.

is this supposed to be an unintended consequence? We all know that the cheap rides of Uber are (partially) the result of them dodging around employer obligations.

And also losing $1B per quarter subsidizing cheap rides for growth and market share.

There just really isn't that much demand for a $20 2-mile ride in the city. Uber has show that there is a HUGE demand for the same trip at $4.

Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees

#157

Post by jacques_chester »

RonaldSchleifer wrote: post #141
jaaron wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I often wonder about this cost to the US economy due to a lack of universal health care: how much productivity is lost due to people staying in jobs just for health care, how many businesses not started, etc.

I doubt you are thinking of that “cost” properly … no one seems to accurately as far as I have been able to tell over several decades now. The whole debate over healthcare is dominated by one of two different mindsets; either based in utter ignorance and wishful thinking, or nefarious and malicious manipulation and conning. The people lauding the wonderful beautified “universal healthcare” (which, btw, they lied to y…

Australia has a comparable tax burden to the USA and also has universal public healthcare with the option to purchase additional private coverage. The public system guarantees that all conditions will be treated, but you may have to wait. The private system gives you considerable flexibility and, because patients who would normally cause adverse selection fall more heavily onto the public system, is much cheaper than equivalent insurance in the USA.

Since we're ticking off items, Australia has both a public pension scheme and compulsory private retirement savings (superannuation). Taxes on petrol are higher than the US but lower than Europe.

I think you've been sucked in by the talking points, mate.

Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees

#158

Post by romanovcode »

uasm wrote: post #147
kmjg88nvf8 wrote: post #115

"Ride-hailing drivers hailed the bill’s passage." - I wonder how happy they will be when their job simply goes away because of that bill. It's terribly misguided and anti-freedom. I think it is a problem if companies like Uber are not honest with their employees, like neglecting to mention that their cars may break down and require maintenance, which should be factored into the income. But that is about honest inform…

> "I wonder how happy they will be when their job simply goes away because of that bill." Taxis are... not "going away". They may get more expensive. Taxi companies are simply going to make a comeback. Uber was making it easier/cheaper for passangers - it did very little for the drivers themselves.

Uber is not Taxi. OP point is still correct. Taxi companies are coming back but Uber drivers get fired.

Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees

#159

Post by pishpash »

zaarn wrote: post #142
lovetocode wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d have to side with Uber and I don’t think their lawyers will have a hard time arguing it. Uber doesn’t own, lease or maintain the vehicles. If the argument is that Uber is a transportation company than how can a transportation company operate if they don’t have any vehicles?

The employees have to buy and maintain the vehicles themselves, doesn't really absolve Uber from being a transportation company, after all, they make transportation happen on their platform as their main business effort.

Nonsense. eBay makes selling happen on their platform, does that make eBay a store and all sellers employees of eBay?

Uber also is a technology company just like eBay.

Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees

#160

Post by paul_f »

Barrin92 wrote: post #138
jackmodern wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

don't know why this is getting down voted, all of you folks using lyft/uber.. get ready for the prices to double or triple.

is this supposed to be an unintended consequence? We all know that the cheap rides of Uber are (partially) the result of them dodging around employer obligations.

I disagree with this. What other job on the planet allows me to work when I want to work, bring my own tools, have no boss, and never even talk to the company I am working for?
Post reply on HN