California passes bill that classifies gig economy workers as employees • Hacker News Board

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

#471

Post by Reedx » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 5:05 PM UTC

chongli wrote: post #400

whiddershins wrote: post #246

All 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…

The way to protect workers is to shift the burden of health care and other costly benefits onto the government, supported by taxes. Then there is no risk to hiring a new employee beyond the wages you pay them. The US public does not want this, though, and the war of words over universal health care has led to incredibly deep entrenchment on the side of those opposed. All this despite the mountain of evidence from oth…

> All this despite the mountain of evidence from other countries, showing the greatly reduced total costs and improved life expectancy

Does this account for confounding factors? Such as the US having the highest obesity rates, which has a massive impact on costs and life expectancy.

I'm for universal healthcare, but "X has these results in Y, therefore it'll be the same in Z" is a poor argument and weakens the overall case.

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

#472

Post by karlp » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 5:05 PM UTC

jchallis wrote: post #420

djsumdog wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In America, you have to work until you die. The major thing the gig economy takes from people is health care. It's insanely expensive, and the Affordable Care Act is a terrible shamble of broken policy. I spent time outside of the US and came back to find health care worse than when I left it: https://fightthefuture.org/article/returning-to-america-and-... I have a friend who has been fighting brain cancer for over a…

Based on the very large revenue from foreign patients who come to America to get cancer treatment on their own dime, those patients and their families care about getting the best treatment.

People do the same in India, Switzerland, Turkey, etc. medical tourism is very common.

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

#473

Post by woah » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 5:06 PM UTC

Spivak wrote: post #469

woah wrote: post #451

This is an extremely heavy handed law which would be destructive to large parts of the economy by making many people’s livelihoods illegal. The drafters of the law knew this, which is why 90% of the text of the law is carve-outs for various professions. But forcing people to live their lives through loopholes never works well. For example, they have this carve out for high skilled professions: > (3) An individual who…

They're not carving out high-skill professions. You'll notice that doctors aren't on that list. They're carving out professions that are already under special regulatory regimes that affect how they're able to sell their work. In part because people/businesses are required by law to contract with people who hold these licenses. Like you cannot build a building without a licensed architect and civil engineer. There wo…

Doctors are exempted in a section immediately above the one I quoted.

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

#474

Post by quaquaqua1 » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 5:06 PM UTC

scardine wrote: post #404

quaquaqua1 wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Correct, it is insane!! It is "legal" in the sense of "the law didn't specifically plan for this workaround that a particularly greedy company found"

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

#475

Post by kec » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 5:08 PM UTC

ilikehurdles wrote: post #438

projproj wrote: post #436

Could Uber make their new employees sign non-compete agreements after the law is passed? A lot of drivers drive for both companies now. Will this restrict drivers to drive for just one company?

Not in CA

Non competes preventing you from workin in industry after you leave an employer are illegal, a clause preventing you from moonlighting for a competitor during your employment is not.

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

#476

Post by kerkeslager » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 5:08 PM UTC

woah wrote: post #451

This is an extremely heavy handed law which would be destructive to large parts of the economy by making many people’s livelihoods illegal. The drafters of the law knew this, which is why 90% of the text of the law is carve-outs for various professions. But forcing people to live their lives through loopholes never works well. For example, they have this carve out for high skilled professions: > (3) An individual who…

Meh, as a freelance software engineer who sometimes works for California employers, I'll be happy to classify myself as an employee and decline health insurance in exchange for higher pay.

While the law could have been written more simply, I think your concern for my well-being is misplaced.

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

#477

Post by simplecomplex » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 5:09 PM UTC

paggle wrote: post #78

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.

Being profoundly unqualified to evaluate legislation, the electorate is highly susceptible to well-crafted advertising on ballot measures and can easily end up voting for something that they don't philosophically agree with. This is why direct democracy is generally considered a failed concept and why California's state administration is generally considered a failure, propped up only by the nearly incomprehensible a…

Speak for yourself. I am no less qualified than my elected reps. You don’t know what’s best for me.

Don’t like voting on the laws that govern you? Then don’t vote.

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

#478

Post by dragonwriter » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 5:09 PM UTC

username90 wrote: post #412

wjmao88 wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because then those drivers would go work for lyft or some other company that doesn't do it? I mean this is why we want competition.

It wont be possible for any taxi company to provide minimum hourly wages without enforcing peoples schedules. I mean, a group of drivers could choose to drive only between 22-06 during weekdays and thus get paid minimum wage for basically sleeping in their car.

> It wont be possible for any taxi company to provide minimum hourly wages without enforcing peoples schedules.

Sure, they have to control how many people are on-pay at any given time. That doesn't require preset schedule; you can have a combination of:

(1) Minimum hourly wage,

(2) Dynamic, demand-based minimum targets and maximum on-payroll quota, where additional drivers aren't permitted to come on-shift of the current quota is reached.

(3) Dynamic, automatic, first-come first-served offers of above-minimum pay if current local staffing is below the minimum target.

No set shifts are required.

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

#479

Post by DeonPenny » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 5:10 PM UTC

buboard wrote: post #200

DeonPenny wrote: post #57

Well, RIP to the Gig economy hopefully robots get here soon. Cause I can't see the market surviving this.

Driver robots? See you in 20 years Its more likely you ll see drivers forming shell contractor companies so they can still work for both uber and lyft etc

Yeh this has happened in a lot of other countries. It's why this won't affect google. Cause they hire companies that hire contractors.

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

#480

Post by moate » Wed, Sep 11, 2019, 5:10 PM UTC

mrguyorama wrote: post #394

bwb wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the weirdest thread I've seen on HN, just pay a little money to Gusto or similar to do this. You are talking about barely any cost to have someone else do it who does it all the time. If you don't have the money to pay $50 bucks then do it yourself and just worry less. The chance you mess up is so low it isn't even a thing.

It's funny because all of these comments are ignoring the thousands of small businesses run by average people that have already solved this problem for over 30 years

All of the (objectively) stupid people I know who successfully own and run businesses with employees, and the people on this site clutching their pearls at the thought of having to fill out ~5 forms.

If you're unable to grow your business because you are scared about a step required to grow your business you aren't going to grow your business. Nobody owes you this. Risk aversion isn't anyone else's fault.