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

Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 887 posts

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#151

Post by stingraycharles »

mixedCase wrote: post #134
stingraycharles wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course not, that’s the “hostage” part of the grandparent. I’m saying that taxi drivers and delivery services were better off before being “disrupted”. And I’m not talking about CA per se, but generally all western countries Uber operates in. They may have a case in developing nations, I am not very familiar with the systems over there pre-Uber so I can’t comment on that.

I'm sorry, but I can't possibly humor calling a job you're willingly partaking in a "hostage" situation. If Uber is offering them a better deal than what they were going through, even if it's still a bad one (by your standards), why should we forbid these people from taking it? I live in a developing nation that takes refugees from communist hellholes and the gig economy is helping them out big time by providing the…

The power balance between employer (Uber) and their drivers is completely out of balance. To claim that the drivers can just ignore Uber would be false, and neither are they able to effectively unionize because they are not officially employees. As such, they cannot negotiate effectively as a group, which means Uber has all the negotiation power.

Again, I am not saying that this is the same case for developing nations; there maybe was no work and/or ability to unionize in the first place. But for large parts of the world this was the case, and Uber just “disrupted” the negotiation abilities of the drivers.

I believe we’re looking at this from two different points of views, a developing nation vs a developed nation (I’m from The Netherlands).

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#152

Post by xyzzy_plugh »

gamblor956 wrote: post #125
ericmay wrote: post #17

Earlier 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…

If I sell something on Etsy they don't have to all of a sudden pay for my healthcare costs. Etsy is not even remotely the same thing as Uber. For starters, shops choose what they want to sell, and for how much, and customers choose which shops on Etsy they wish to buy from. Other than handling payment processing, Etsy operates just like a mall. In contrast, riders don't get to choose which driver they get; Uber choos…

> California, including especially the Bay Area, LA, and San Diego, has public transportation

You really had me for a moment until I realized you're joking :)

In all seriousness, public transportation in California is the real joke.

> It is possible to visit every major city and national park in CA using just public transportation.

Sure, and it's possible for me to canoe to Antarctica but it's not a reasonable way for anyone to travel.

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#153

Post by victoro »

jacobn wrote: post #28

We’re legally unequipped to deal well with gig workers. They’re arguably neither contractors nor employees, and shoe horning them into either category will inevitably lead to some absurdities.

I'm wildly out of my depth, but why couldn't Uber drivers be regulated effectively as micro-franchises? The dynamics seem pretty similar -- drivers benefit from the Uber marketing, brand (which brings trust which is necessary in a business as personal as getting into a stranger's car) and "secret sauce" (the dispatch network and app experience). Uber wants to control some aspects of each "franchise" like the cleanliness of vehicles, making sure that they don't discriminate against customers in unappealing areas, and, to some extent pricing. This is necessary to maintain the Brand and keep customers coming back. Uber doesn't want to get into all aspects of running the franchise (setting hours, making sure drivers are only driving for them etc), because it would un-profitable to do at such scale -- just like McDonalds doesn't want to get deal with the management of individual restaurants.

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#154

Post by tzs »

TuringNYC wrote: post #68
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #2

Seems like a fair outcome to me. If they can't operate within the law, they shouldn't operate.

I'm conflicted about this because i believe drivers deserve benefits but also uber should not be forced to pay full benefits for someone who drives just a bit on a weekend night. Where is the line of hours driven until you get benefits? I dont know, but I think that is the wrong question. The right question is -- why is this forced onto Uber rather than being a question of national healthcare. If we offered national…

> I'm conflicted about this because i believe drivers deserve benefits but also uber should not be forced to pay full benefits for someone who drives just a bit on a weekend night.

> Where is the line of hours driven until you get benefits? I dont know, but I think that is the wrong question.

I wonder if there is a reason it could't work like this:

• If you work N hours in a week for employer X, where N meets the benefit threshold, T, for some type of benefit, the employer has to provide that benefit.

• If N does not meet that threshold, the employer has to make a payment of N/T x C to the State, where C is the weekly cost for the person to pay for that benefit themselves.

• The State keeps track of these payments on a per worker basis and works with the benefit providers to use them as a subsidy on the worker's cost to buy the benefit.

For example, for health insurance, if Bob drove 40 hours a week for Uber, Uber would have to offer Bob the same health insurance they provide their full time employees.

If Bob only drives 10 hours a week for Uber, delivers food for Grubhub 15 hours a week, and does 10 hours waiting tables at a cafe, none of those would have to provide health insurance, because the threshold is 30 hours. But Uber would have to contribue 1/3 C, Grubhub 1/2 C, and the cafe 1/3 C to the State for Bob's health insurance. That would be enough to cover Bob getting health insurance on his state's ACA market.

It would actually be more than enough. If the excess carries over to be used in weeks when Bob works less than 30 hours total, then as long as Bob averages 30 hours of work a week, he has health insurance.

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#155

Post by GaryNumanVevo »

nwallin wrote: post #150
GaryNumanVevo wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Categorically false, the law isn’t being changed. A judge ruled that Uber was violating labor laws which specifically protect both contractors and full time employees.

The law has most definitely been changed. If the law were a human, it wouldn't be old enough to walk. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Assembly_Bill_5_(20...

So the outrage over "workers rights" is delayed until Uber can no longer exploit them?

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#156

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

fooey wrote: post #147
cft wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is parasitic about it? That they are using public roads?

They operate under illegal business models to produce impossibly low costs, driving out all legitimate competitors, including municipal infrastructure. The Uber business plan has always been to break the law at a massive enough scale that they can buy new laws before enforcement catches up with them.

I'm just not convinced this is a thing that's happened. Which cities have avoided investing in municipal infrastructure just because Uber exists?

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#157

Post by bhupy »

ac29 wrote: post #138
ekianjo wrote: post #83

> "What worker doesn't want to have access to paid sick leave?" Becerra said. "What worker doesn't want to have unemployment insurance at a time of Covid-19 crisis? What worker doesn't want to know that they'll get paid for overtime if they work 60 hours in a week or 12 hours in a day?" Since when are we reasoning about workers starting from what they want? If we go by that reasoning, "What worker does not want to be…

> Increase the costs of running the service, and you don't have work anymore. This hasn't been found to be the case when increasing the minimum wage, though.

Right, you get price increases instead, which are a more regressive way to guarantee a basic minimum standard of living than a publicly funded safety net.

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#158

Post by nwallin »

catsarebetter wrote: post #61

So basically, Lyft wins in CA? Ubers out and Lyft will comply and can finally raise the prices on rides however they want. Am I missing something?

Lyft is also a target of this injunction. It isn't clear yet that Lyft will begin complying with AB5.

Re: Uber CEO says its service will probably shut down temporarily in California

#160

Post by jayd16 »

cft wrote: post #55
sjroot wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Uber isn't special. If they can't exist without exploiting workers then they shouldn't exist. The void will get filled by something better.
Post reply on HN