There is zero barrier to entry for a rideshare service. (Just ask the city of Austin.) Absent COVID, competitors would be coming out of the woodwork to supply this market with fairly-paid drivers. That means the cost of a ride will double, but that simply means we'll be paying taxicab rates for much better service than taxis provided in the past. We've known all along that Uber's prices were too low to be sustainable anyway.
Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California
51–60 of 887 posts
Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like a great outcome for the people who are relying on that work for income right now.
If Uber hasn't been preparing internally for the possibility of losing this suit, they've been irresponsible in the hopes that California would go "oh shit, they're gonna shoot the hostage".
They have since before the suit was filed, that's why they are sponsoring a ballot initiative on the November ballot to exempt themselves from the ABC rule articulated in the Dynamex case and then codified in AB5.
The temporary shutdown (which will probably be reversed win or lose, but more profitably if they win) isn't so much a response to the injunction but a stunt related to the campaign for the ballot measure.
They almost certainly have fallback plans if they lose both the suit and the ballot measure, but they aren't as desirable and they'd rather operate with the rules aligned in their favor, and they are willing to accept significant short-term cost to maximize the prospects of that outcome.
Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Uber hasn't been preparing internally for the possibility of losing this suit, they've been irresponsible in the hopes that California would go "oh shit, they're gonna shoot the hostage".
Well, I'm sure they have. They fundamentally disagree with the outcome, and so they will just not operate in California. Nobody will because the business model won't allow you to pay people enough money without charging too much. I also fundamentally agree with Uber and others here. They created a platform for someone to make a few bucks. If I sell something on Etsy they don't have to all of a sudden pay for my healt…
I suspect this pleases the gov't transit authorities and unions, now they have less competition by decree. (Yes I realize Uber "could" stay, but practically speaking for a business, not really).
It just annoys me it's couched as "we are doing this for the worker!", and then those workers have no work.
Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California
#54Could this be posturing to get the state to back down on the enforcement of its decision? And does anyone have a guess if Uber is making money in California right now? Given the state is still in lock down.
it is. Airbnb tried to pull the same trick in New York City. All Uber has to do is follow the law. Of course they can't since their business model is based on violating labour laws. If your business model relies on doing something illegal to make money then you are no better than the mafia, it's just organized crime. As for people here who invoke "freedom of work". Most people doing these jobs don't have much choice…
> Airbnb tried to pull the same trick in New York City
I think this is a good comparison, with the caveat that there is a major difference in the political calculus: the people who get the most benefit from AirBnB in NYC are people visiting NYC (i.e. people who can't vote in NYC). AirBnB is generally not popular among the people who live here because people don't like transients in their buildings and perceive it (probably rightfully) as driving up rents.
Uber/Lyft on the other hand are used by locals (i.e. voters) as well as tourists. They are perceived as bringing prices down by breaking the supply constraints of the medalian system.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California
#55Seems like a fair outcome to me. If they can't operate within the law, they shouldn't operate.
Sounds like a great outcome for the people who are relying on that work for income right now.
I applaud the CEO for this decision. It forces at least a glimpse of understanding on the local voters that one cannot combine ideological utopia and a functional economy.
Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California
#56Maybe I'm cynical but "temporarily shut down" sounds like a formula to: - Inconvenience a certain class of urbanites who have grown accustomed to being driven around in the hopes that they - Complain loudly to their representatives and other governmental officials in the hope that - The state will reverse this judgement
Which is, of course, something Uber's done several times before. It's hardly cynical.
Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I'm sure they have. They fundamentally disagree with the outcome, and so they will just not operate in California. Nobody will because the business model won't allow you to pay people enough money without charging too much. I also fundamentally agree with Uber and others here. They created a platform for someone to make a few bucks. If I sell something on Etsy they don't have to all of a sudden pay for my healt…
comparing uber and etsy is dishonest at best. The only freedom an uber contractor has is "when to work". All the pricing and trips are decided by uber, and they can't even reject properly. They are in fact an employees in everything but legal status. In etsy, you choose your prices, what you sell, and even to whom you sell to, it's definitely a market place.
Drivers have been able to set their own prices in California for some time now https://www.uber.com/blog/california/set-your-fares/
Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California
#58Maybe I'm cynical but "temporarily shut down" sounds like a formula to: - Inconvenience a certain class of urbanites who have grown accustomed to being driven around in the hopes that they - Complain loudly to their representatives and other governmental officials in the hope that - The state will reverse this judgement
That's surely what they're doing. Of course, they probably chose a bad time for this. If those customers are social distancing, probably fewer of them will be inconvenienced than before. I share one car with two people, so used uber a lot pre-pandemic, but haven't needed one at all since March.
Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California
#59Seems like a fair outcome to me. If they can't operate within the law, they shouldn't operate.
Sounds like a great outcome for the people who are relying on that work for income right now.
Sure, it's a threat. Like "human shields" is a threat. Uber surely isn't slavery, but that doesn't make this threat not a parallel to the "food and shelter" slaveowner defense.
Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like a great outcome for the people who are relying on that work for income right now.
If Uber hasn't been preparing internally for the possibility of losing this suit, they've been irresponsible in the hopes that California would go "oh shit, they're gonna shoot the hostage".
Not irresponsible
They shouldn't force to operate a business that loses money, which is not going to be sustainable anyway.