Can someone explain why both the Uber and Lyft stocks are up on this news?
Makes it harder for any new competitors. This just entrenches the old guard.
California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees
401–410 of 754 posts
Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees
#402I wonder if they could please make a law so that Google's publishers are considered employees as well?
Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees
#403All these people making Uber money on the side ... the whole thing was possible in part due to the low friction in (and also complete disregard for) the regulatory environment. I’m in NYC and honestly can’t figure out how to legally hire a studio assistant for a few hours a week without being at risk for any of a number of lawsuit vectors. So I just coil my own cables. And I don’t mentor people who want to learn some…
Here's a quick guide to employer regulation in NYC. With one part-time employee you would be exempt from many statutes:
https://www.lexisnexis.com/legalnewsroom/labor-employment/b/...
Also, part of the purpose of incorporation is to provide a personal liability shield as a catch-all.
Any policy has benefits and drawbacks. Yes, somebody is losing out on beneficial employment with you. But somebody else is being saved from being paid $5/hr under dangerous conditions without workers comp.
Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees
#404Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting, in Brazil all the companies in the chain are liable in a labor-related law suit. Before the 2017 Labor Reform[1], frivolous law suits by former employees were a billionaire market because it used to be a risk-free gamble - after the reform the litigant is liable for exaggerated claims and there was a 46% drop in labor cases[2]. When I look at any market where the labor code is excessively protective, I s…
There is definitely a causation for high unemployment by such laws. But it actually goes even deeper. In France for example, it is difficult for a company to fire an employee once they are legally hired. Oracle, for example, has a policy of initiating an "intra-country transfer" where the employee is mandated to relocate from Paris to Montpellier. Not everyone wants to uproot their family like that. And then if they…
Interesting, so in France you can't fire someone but can legally make his life miserable through constant relocation? Brutal...
Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees
#405Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can think of many different ways to interpret your first sentence, so I'm not clear what you're saying, but this does make me wonder if it's going to lead to any sort of licensing or certification for general industry programmers. If workers in this field want to call themselves "software engineers" and gain the benefits of a professional title, like lawyers and architects, they're going to have to start following…
> If workers in this field want to call themselves "software engineers" and gain the benefits of a professional title What are those benefits?
Good question. For doctors (in my country at least) it amounts to a government-enforced monopoly that keeps rates high.
It would probably cause the low end of pay to go up for software engineers, but not affect the high end.
Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees
#406If this actually gets enforced, I predict we'll all be talking about the law of unintended consequences in a year's time.
One thing that I find disappointing in this legislation is that I wish it did essentially the reverse: instead of forcing the drivers to be employees, I wish it loosened the control Uber/Lyft had to bring it down to the level of what should be expected for independent contractors. The biggest issue for me is pricing - the fact that drivers have 0 input to rates always made the IC designation fiction. But if the apps…
> But if the apps worked eventually like a reverse auction, where drivers got to set their own rates and you could then choose based on distance and cost, that would be much more of a true marketplace model with independent sellers.
It's interesting to think what kind of efficiencies could be unlocked with a more versatile and robust driver-client interaction. Could clients order a ride at X time to Y location and have drivers bid down to fulfill the ride? Could the bid-down process be performed automatically based on the driver's personal settings on pricing and location?
Ultimately these efficiencies would make the driver's life better. The UI for the rider may be similar and the price may be similar (or higher!) as well.
Uber and Lyft had their chance to show leadership and empower their drivers if they truly believed their drivers were contractors, rather than leaving them in some gray zone of partially contractor and partially employee.
Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees
#407All these people making Uber money on the side ... the whole thing was possible in part due to the low friction in (and also complete disregard for) the regulatory environment. I’m in NYC and honestly can’t figure out how to legally hire a studio assistant for a few hours a week without being at risk for any of a number of lawsuit vectors. So I just coil my own cables. And I don’t mentor people who want to learn some…
That "flexibility" means precarity as the majority of gig employees do this full-time: >In California, the legislation will affect at least one million workers who have been on the receiving end of a decades-long trend of outsourcing and franchising work, making employer-worker relationships more arm’s-length. Many people have been pushed into contractor status with no access to basic protections like a minimum wage…
Absent that flexibility many people wouldn't be working at all. Both because their life situations don't allow them to take another job as employees, and because the companies' labor needs do not justify the cost of adding additional employees.
> Uber and Lyft have repeatedly warned that they will have to start scheduling drivers in advance if they are employees, reducing drivers’ ability to work when and where they want.
>Experts said that there is nothing in the bill that requires employees to work set shifts, and that Uber and Lyft are legally entitled to continue allowing drivers to make their own scheduling decisions.
>In practice, Uber and Lyft might choose to limit the number of drivers who can work during slow hours or in less busy markets, where drivers may not generate enough in fares to justify their payroll costs as employees. That could lead to a reduced need for drivers over all.
>But Veena Dubal, a professor at the University of California Hastings College of the Law, said it would still generally be advantageous for Uber and Lyft to rely on incentives like bonus pay to ensure they had enough drivers on the road to adjust to customer demand much more nimbly than if they scheduled drivers in advance.
I think the experts cited in this article are not getting at the crux of the problem. Offering employee benefits means that each driver has an overhead cost to the rideshare company. Drivers need to generate a minimum amount of revenue for rideshare company, otherwise the driver is a net loss for the company. So Uber and Lyft are going to have to start scheduling drivers to generate a certain threshold of revenue, and if drivers don't meet that they'll be let go.
Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees
#408Earlier 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.
Oh no workers will make a reasonable income!
No, workers lose their jobs. 2-3x increase in prices is not sustainable for such services except for a minority of rides. UberX will disappear and it will become only UberBlack.
Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees
#409All these people making Uber money on the side ... the whole thing was possible in part due to the low friction in (and also complete disregard for) the regulatory environment. I’m in NYC and honestly can’t figure out how to legally hire a studio assistant for a few hours a week without being at risk for any of a number of lawsuit vectors. So I just coil my own cables. And I don’t mentor people who want to learn some…
I would highly recommend you reach out to local educational institutions to see if they have intern/co-op programs. You might be able to get some help with the administrative parts of the process.
Re: California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees
#410Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They probably can't prevent them from taking a second job They absolutely can and they probably will. You can put almost anything you want in an employment contract, and agreeing not to work for a competitor is an extremely common clause.
Not in California can they do that (non compete clauses are not enforceable in California).
I am aware, but I don't believe California's prohibition on non-competition clauses covers the scenario where you're still employed by the company.