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

601–610 of 887 posts

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

#601

Post by solidasparagus »

manfredo wrote: post #324
nostoc wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The drivers are outside of Uber's business. Uber is a software and technology company, not a taxi service. That is some serious mental gymnastic.

No, it's not. Is Apple in the business of producing records because it runs iTunes? No, it's in the business of software (and hardware), and some of that software is used to sell music. Trying to claim that a software service to run a marketplace to sell X is the same thing as actually running a business of building or doing X takes some mental gymnastics.

Yes, Apple is absolutely a music publishing company (among other things) because it runs iTunes.

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

#602

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

gamblor956 wrote: post #379
rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There obviously needs to be a new class of workers. I've seen the phrase "Dependent Contractor" tossed around here on HN and I think it'd do quite well. If you work for an employer who sets your hours, pay, etc., you'd still be designated as an employee. If you sell your labor to multiple entities, and/or you set your own pay rate, you're an independent contractor. If you do not set your pay rate, you'd be a "depende…

A "dependent contractor" is literally what an employee is, except that in your scenario it would just be an employee without the decades of hard-fought labor protections like bathroom breaks.

If a grocery store cashier could punch out an hour into their shift, take a day off on a whim, or switch between 3 different grocery stores depending on which is paying better, I'd be inclined to agree with you, but you have to admit that gig work is quite different than traditional employer-employee relationships (which is why they're classified as independent contractors in most of the U.S.). They're not paid a salary or hourly; they're paid per gig, and they're under no obligation to accept any gig.

True, they're not nearly as empowered as a traditional independent contractor like a plumber who can set his own prices, but they're not as powerless as a traditional employee who has no control over their hours either. They're something in between, and their work should be regulated as such.

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

#603

Post by djinnandtonic »

This is fantastic news! Now there's a huge market available for a rideshare app that wants to prosper by actual good service rather than wage theft and outright hostility to the regulations of the market they operate in.

I hope some hungry founders-to-be are working on this now.

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

#604

Post by GhostVII »

gamblor956 wrote: post #428
GhostVII wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, a "dependent contractor" is completely different from a regular employee. As an employee you are generally required to work certain hours, or at the very least do a certain amount of work in a week, and are paid either hourly or salaried. A dependent contractor, in this example, can set their own hours, start or stop working whenever they want, and gets paid per job rather than per hour or month.

Today I learned from the internet that I have been wrong about the advice I have been providing clients for the past decade... /s Employees have contracts, too. Everything you have described as supposed features of dependent contractors are features of independent contractors. Indeed, that last point is one of the biggest historical factors (in the US, and most of Europe) for determining whether a worker is an employ…

Current classifications are irrelevant because the parent was laying out a new system, in which you could either be an employee, an independent contractor, or a dependent contractor. Under that proposed system, there is a significant difference between a dependent contractor and an employee, because the dependent contractor can choose to stop working whenever they want, and can work for multiple companies, while an employee could not do that.

And regardless, I don't know of any hourly employees who can choose to stop working for several weeks without notice, and then start working again whenever they want. That is a major difference between something like Uber, and a normal hourly job. Also hourly people are paid by the hour, while with Uber you are paid by the job.

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

#605

Post by closeparen »

runako wrote: post #474
twblalock wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The power to create laws is not supposed to be used as weapon. It clearly was in this case. AB5 was written in bad faith with the goal of hurting specific companies, not with the goal of writing a sensible law that sets a framework for how businesses ought to operate. They wrote it in such a hurry that it unintentionally hurt a bunch of other people and small businesses. That's not how laws are supposed to work.

Would you consider all labor and environmental laws to have been crafted as a weapon? One could argue that much of our labor and environmental protective apparatus was written to curb behaviors of specific companies (or "business models," if you prefer).

It’s usually written to make existing manufacturing activity clean up after itself, or existing employment relationships better for the employees. There may be some collateral damage, but the intent is not to destroy.

“People’s jobs should be better” is a different goal from “bad jobs should not exist.” It may be used as a tool to achieve the former, but we care whether it’s actually effective at doing so.

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

#606

Post by crooked-v »

DuskStar wrote: post #590
dnissley wrote: post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're claiming that those cities are extremely dangerous. But in reality, that's just innumeracy.

I think someone attempting to get an Uber pickup (or getting dropped off by an Uber) in the middle of CHOP/CHAZ might have had some problems. Particularly at night. Or any "drop me off within the ongoing protest" ride, really.

Problems? Sure. It's going to be hell to try and get in and out of the area, since you'll have to either go at about two miles an hour while people move out of the way (while regularly stopping and waiting for unorganized crowds), or just go around the long way.

'Getting dragged out of your car and beaten'? No, unless the police do it (https://www.newsbreak.com/georgia/atlanta/news/1577488884462...).

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

#607

Post by jonahhorowitz »

jjcon wrote: post #549
Barrin92 wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> also don't see who benefits from this. Long term society by establishing that Uber doesn't get to write the law and dodge their responsibility as an employer. It's about time they get knocked down a notch after their campaign against DeBlasio.

I agree with you but I also think that they should have waited. Right now is a terrible time to wipe out the gig economy. So many people are turning to it and it is creating value. Economic/employment changes like this one are best suited when the market is strong because people job mobility is higher etc.

There was no choice to "wait". AB5 was passed to fix the law because of a court decision [0]. Had they (the CA Legislature) not passed AB5, the court finding in Dynamex would be just as bad for Uber.

The court doesn't have an option to "wait" just because it's a recession.

Uber doesn't have a choice to "wait" because this ruling is going to go into effect in ~10 days unless the stay is extended.

[0] - https://scocal.stanford.edu/opinion/dynamex-operations-west-...

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

#608

Post by mlthoughts2018 »

julienb_sea wrote: post #556
mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either companies will fill the gap left by Uber in a way that gives drivers a better version than they had before, or drivers will find other work. This same faulty argument is made often to argue you shouldn’t reduce exploitative child or sex labor, especially in developing countries, but it’s not valid. If Uber employment option is exploitative, you cannot use drivers’ own willingness to accept work via that platfo…

I want to point out, it is possible for government to over-regulate a business model out of financial viability. Employees can and often will push for unreasonable compensation or protections. You may argue the model can regress to essentially taxis. But realize that taxis work due to artificial supply side restrictions generally using a medallion system and strict limits on numbers. This is fundamentally different f…

I do agree, it’s not an easy problem.

But I think in the case of Uber it’s beyond debate that drivers, as an overall class, are not better off “having the freedom” to work under Uber’s (or other firm’s) poor conditions.

I’d say the same thing of Amazon warehouse workers too.

The conditions of these employment agreements should become legally not possible, so that workers don’t become effectively indentured servants to a working agreement that makes them worse off than some societally agreed standard, and feeling trapped and having the bad working conditions create a feedback mechanism bu which they can’t realistically choose to stop that working agreement and seek betterment.

These examples, in American standards, are egregious, nowhere close to any boundary where the government is asking unreasonable concessions of Uber.

If meeting these conditions doesn’t allow Uber to remain financially solvent, then Uber is not and never was a business, only a scam.

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

#609

Post by GhostVII »

abeppu wrote: post #429
GhostVII wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, a "dependent contractor" is completely different from a regular employee. As an employee you are generally required to work certain hours, or at the very least do a certain amount of work in a week, and are paid either hourly or salaried. A dependent contractor, in this example, can set their own hours, start or stop working whenever they want, and gets paid per job rather than per hour or month.

How would you compare a "dependent contractor" to a restaurant worker who is largely paid in tips, and where management changes their working schedule frequently and erratically?

The dependent contractor can stop working without facing reprocussions, the restaurant worker has to work the shifts that they are scheduled or they will get fired.

Also the restaurant worker is guaranteed minimum wage, while the dependent contractor is not, since they are not paid hourly.

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

#610

Post by qeternity »

baron_harkonnen wrote: post #510
qeternity wrote: post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So Uber driver’s are too dumb to realize they’re being paid unfair wages? Why would anyone work for such a company if they have better alternatives?

And if they don't have better alternatives? Sometimes I actively look forward to the tech job market collapsing.

> And if they don't have better alternatives?

Then it would seem applying more pressure to their already unprofitable employer is an unwise move...

Post reply on HN